This content is not yet available over encrypted connections.

Liberal Democracy

Liberal Democracy
The Free State

Friday, August 31, 2012

FRSFreeStatePlus: C-Span: Mitt Romney Acceptance Speech at the Republican National Convention: Real Change or Back to Bush?

What I liked about Mitt Romney's speech Thursday night, trying to look at it from someone who's not going to vote for him. But trying to look at the speech as objectively as possible, again as a Democrat, is that Mitt has a beautiful family, including his wife. His sons daughter in laws, grandchildren. A man who values his community and children and so fourth, he
introduced himself to the country Mitt Romney the man, rather then as the politician which is really the only thing we've seen from him so far. Which is important for Americans to see because this is one thing they use to decide who they should vote for. But getting past that, Americans need to know what the Presidential Nominee will do as President of the United States, not Governor of Massachusetts or President of Bain Capital. But the biggest job in the World that anyone could ever apply for and Mitt Romney still hasn't answered that question, what would be different from a Romney Presidency then a Bush Presidency. We know how different Mitt would be from President Obama, they literally agree on basically nothing, other then they both love their families and the United States. Which can be said about almost every other American but how would a President Romney be different from a President Bush.

Democratic Political Strategist James Carville said on CNN last night that there was nothing in Mitt Romney's speech. That separates him from President Bush, his Economic Policy, is basically the same as President Bush's, lower taxes on investors and corporations, lower regulations on corporation's. And somehow doing this would benefit the rest of the economy, on energy expanding American, Oil, Gas and Nuclear, that we can drill our away not to American Energy Independence but North American Energy Independence. On Foreign Policy, talk tough on Russia, China and Iran, even if that means going to war with Iran, something that President Bush looked into. So my question would be how's this not Bush 2.0 where are the difference between President Bush, perhaps the most unpopular President we've ever had thats left President Obama with the problems we are still dealing with. And a possible President Romney?

If Mitt Romney's case for being President is that these are the policies that we had in the last decade. So we should do it again, then thats a loser and he may lose overwhelmingly, he's going to have to get past President Bush and President Obama and be able to tell Americans there's a different. Course we should take, he had the biggest opportunity he'll have in this campaign last night and failed to accomplish it.

Human Events: John Gizzi: Mitt Romney Offers Vision of Hope for America, Sets Himself Apart from President Obama

Romney offers vision of hope for America, sets himself apart from Obama - Conservative News

"Romney offers vision of hope for America, sets himself apart from Obama". Isn't that what we heard four years ago, I seem to of heard a lot about hope in 2008 but from a different Presidential Nominee.

Washington Times: KUHNER: Romney's not Bush 2.0

KUHNER: Romney's not Bush 2.0 - Washington Times

If you at the policy, its hard to tell the differences right now

Thursday, August 30, 2012

FRSFreeStatePlus: GOP Convention: GOP Vice Presidential Nominee Representative Paul Ryan: Reaction To This Speech

My first reaction of Representative Paul Ryan's speech last night, was how calm the audience was. Not interrupting Paul Ryan the entire speech from what I recall and very light with applause as well. It was almost like the people were high or attending an opera or a college lecture, rather then a political convention and when I watch the Democratic Convention or parts of it. Especially the President and Vice President, I'll look to see if the Democrats there are as calm as the Republicans this week. Another reaction to this speech was that how much it sounded like a lecture rather then a political speech, except for how short it was in knowledge and facts. I hope for the audience's sake, that they weren't taking notes and using to prepare for a test on the Presidency of Barack Obama or something. Because they would all fail based on their notes from this speech, unless Paul Ryan is the professor, for someone whose known in Congress as a Budget Hawk and numbers cruncher. He was very light in both areas, it was one of the shortest speeches I've ever heard when it comes to facts and substance. Paul Ryan is suppose to be a man of substance and was going to take this election to a higher level, where all he was last night was an Attack Dog, a Bogus Attack Dog at that.

Its not that Paul Ryan was an Attack Dog last night that I have a problem with, thats the job of the Vice Presidential Nominee. While their Running Mate is suppose to take the higher road, its how short in facts this Attack Dog was, taking little facts about President Obama. And making them look as bad as he possibly could get away with, the Janesville Plan closing, that actually happen. In December 2008 a month before Barack Obama became President, is a perfect example of that, the Medicare cuts that Ryan talks about that were in the Affordable Care Act. Are actually in the Ryan Plan, its like a car thief blaming someone for stealing a car. And the other thing I take away from this speech/lecture last night, was how short in substance it was. The Romney/Ryan Administration is going to put the country back to work, even though there's nothing in their records that indicate they know how to do that. Mitt Romney 48th in Job Growth as Governor of Massachusetts, Paul Ryan has essentially been in Congress his whole career.

Its really the job of the Presidential Nominee to lay out the plan of his Presidency and maybe we'll see that tonight from Mitt Romney. Even though I wouldn't bet a dime that we'll here that tonight, Mitt is not known for substance, he tends to speak more in goals rather then plans. But Representative Ryan kept saying he an Governor Romney were going to do this and that but they don't have a plan to accomplish it.

Washington Times: Senator John Cornyn: Path to a Republican Senate

CORNYN: Path to a Republican Senate - Washington Times

This path is getting smaller and smaller everyday based on Senate GOP Self Inflicted Wounds

Wednesday, August 29, 2012

EFAN 2011: Richard Nixon's 1968 GOP Presidential Acceptance Speech: The Silent Majority

The 1960s was actually a pretty good time for America even though we were very divided as a country over Vietnam, civil rights and the Great Society. The Civil Rights Act was passed in 1964 which outlawed racial discrimination under law in the United States. The Voting Rights Act was passed in 1965. Which meant no longer would be people be denied their right to vote based on their race. The Fair Housing Law was passed in 1968. Which meant no longer would people be allowed to deny other people housing based on race. Medicare was passed in 1965, which meant seniors would always have guaranteed health insurance in America.

The economy boomed in that decade. The Federal Government was actually able to balanced its budget during this decade. But this was also one of the most turbulent and divisive decades we've ever had in America. Four political leaders were assassinated in this decade. President Kennedy, Malcolm X, Rev. Dr. Martin L. King and of course Senator Robert Kennedy in 1968. King and Kennedy in 68, within two months, April and June. Hundreds of thousands of Americans dying or injured in the Vietnam War, the South moving from solidly Democratic to solidly Republican in 1968.

Richard Nixon understood the mood of America about as well as any politician we've ever produced. And understood where the country was and where they were going and how he could fit in that into his politics. As far as what he believed and what he wanted to accomplish. And he could make that work politically for him and the Republican Party. This whole speech is a perfect example of that, where he says, ;that a country thats run by the rule of law, has lawlessness throughout the country.' He's talking about the riots in our big cities like Detroit, Chicago, Los Angeles and others.

'When the a country with the greatest military in the world gets bogged down in a civil war in a third world country.' He's talking about the Vietnam War. 'When these things happen its time for a change in leadership in the greatest country in the world.' Meaning the United States. Dick Nixon was laying out where the country was, all the divisiveness that the country was going through. And what wasn't working in the country and saying its time for a change in leadership in America. And saying he's the one meaning who will bring that new leadership that will move America forward.

Washington Times: Gov. Chris Christie Vouches for Mitt Romney: 'Solutions will not be Painless'

Christie vouches for Romney: 'Solutions will not be painless' - Washington Times

Chris Christie made a fat ass out of himself Tuesday night

Tuesday, August 28, 2012

FRSFreeStatePlus: CBS News 1976 GOP Convention Coverage: GOP Split Down The Middle

The highlight of this 1976 GOP Convention to me was not Ron Reagan speaking to his supporters and the rest of the RNC. To calm the RNC down so they could move on with the business of the Convention but was President Gerry Ford's acceptance speech, it was a real Conservative Republican speech. Where he highlighted all of his veto's that he had as President and what he called a Tax and Spend Democratic Congress, in an era of high budget deficits and what he saw as Tax and Spend Democrats. It was a speech that was not only designed to speak to his supporters but also address the Reagan supporters as well. The GOP was a party that was basically divided between two groups of Conservatives, the Ford Conservatives and the Reagan Conservatives and they essentially couldn't make up their mind in who to endorse. But they weren't divided ideologically but on personality, who was best fit to lead the Republican Party and the United States. Even though both Ford and Reagan were pretty close ideologically, they both believed in strong defense, cutting taxes. Cutting the size of the Federal Government, both were close on Social Issues and not fans of the Religious Right but were different people personally.

The Republican Party lost the 1976 Republican Convention and failed to make advancements in Congress. Because they were split down the middle between two people and who they should choose to lead their party, it wasn't so much that they were split ideologically like the Democrats in 1980. But who was the person who was the most qualified to lead the Republican Party personally and they paid a heavy price for it politically in 1976. As they lost one of the closest Presidential Elections in American History, an Election they should've won had they been united.

Human Events: Pat Buchanan: Last hurrah of Nixon's 'New Majority'?

Buchanan: Last hurrah of Nixon's 'New Majority'? - Conservative News

The problem with the Nixon Coalition is that its getting older, is dying off and getting smaller. And for the GOP to remain viable in the future, they are going to have to bring in new voters. Who aren't Republicans today.

Washington Times: GOP Plank Decries 'Social Experimentation' in Military

GOP plank decries 'social experimentation' in military - Washington Times

This is all about Gays in The Military

Monday, August 27, 2012

Reagan Foundation: Ronald Reagan- A Time For a Choosing

The so called Reagan Revolution of 1980, that brought Ronald Reagan to the presidency and thirty or so new House Republicans and the Senate Republicans winning control of the Senate for the first time since 1952, actually started in 1964 under Barry Goldwater. Ron Reagan just had the personality to sell American conservatism to the country and show Americans that it wasn't scary. It took really sixteen years for the Republican Party to control both the White House and at least one chamber of Congress. 

But all of these steps were put in place starting in 1964, when the message was put together. When Republicans started winning in the South consistently in 1966, a big reason Richard Nixon was elected President in 1968, won a landslide in 1972, because Southerners were becoming Republicans. The Democratic Party was losing its grasp on the South and hasn't gotten it back since. Congressional Republicans lost overwhelmingly in Congress in 1974, but a lot of that had to do with Watergate. 

Republicans lost again in at least partially due to Watergate 1976 and Ron Reagan ran for President in 1976. And came damn close to winning the Republican nomination from President Gerry Ford and kept this message of individual freedom and personal responsibility alive. The tax revolt of the late 1970s, especially in California, all of these things were part of the Goldwater/Reagan Revolution. Thanks to Barry Goldwater, the Republican Party was changing from a yes fiscally conservative socially moderate party. 

The GOP was mostly in the Northeast and Midwest and became a party that was able to communicate this message across the country and take this message to the South. The only thing with the South, is they brought in the Religious Right to go along with Republicans who are more libertarian than statist when it comes to social issues. But the GOP understood that they were simply too small and had to grow their base to compete with Democrats in the future.  

Washington Times: Ron Paul Forecasts a Libertarian Storm Brewing

Paul forecasts a libertarian storm brewing - Washington Times

Libertarianism is here to stay in America and its only going to get bigger

Washington Times: NATO: 202 Afghan Bases Closed, with More to Come

NATO: 202 Afghan bases closed, with more to come - Washington Times

Nato and America hopefully figuring out that its time to get the Hell out of Afghanistan

Friday, August 24, 2012

FRSFreeStatePlus: CNBC: Representative Paul Ryan talks Healthcare Reform with Howard Dean and John Sheils From 2009: What a Public Option Should Be

Back in July 2009, former DNC Chairman Howard Dean was debating Healthcare Reform with Representative Paul Ryan. Who was then the Ranking Member of the Budget Committee not Chairman, when the House Republicans were still in the minority. And Representative Ryan was actually making the case for why a Public Option would be a good idea in Healthcare Reform. He was literally arguing that this would make people want to choose the Public Option over their private Health Insurer and that. Private Health Insurers wouldn't be able to compete with the Public Option, because the Public Option would deliver Health Insurance at a lower cost. He was arguing that the private Health Insurers wouldn't be able to compete with the way they currently do business and a Public Option would force them out of business. One of the reasons for a Public Option is not to force private Health Insurers out of business, which is what Progressives want. But along with the Patient Bill of Rights is to force them to change their business model. To deliver better Customer Service, one through competition through private Non Profit Health Insurers but also through regulation.

One of the beauties of a Public Option, is that its exactly that a choice, its not forcing people onto Medicare. Whether they want it or not or outlawing the private Health Insurance Industry but giving more Americans including people who can't currently afford Health Insurance. The ability to decide for themselves where to get their Health Insurance or be able to keep their current Health Insurance. Unlike Medicare For All Single Payer which would require everyone in the country to be on Medicare, whether they want it or not, they would no longer be able to make that. Decision for themselves and a Public Option could be done in a way where you wouldn't have to grow the Federal Government but allow the States to set up their own Medicare Public Option plan. Progressive Democrats in Congress have introduce a Single Payer plan, led by Representative Jim McDermott that would allow the States to set up their own Medicare plans as well.

Three years ago Representative Ryan was making the case and I'm sure he did this unintentionally, of why a Public Option. Would be a good idea, because it would force private Health Insurers to change their business model or go out of business. Which is the whole point of a Public Option to bring much needed competition to a bad private Health Insurance System, which is what we need.

The National Journal: Alex Roarty: GOP Convention to Feature Ron Paul Tribute

GOP Convention to Feature Ron Paul Tribute - Alex Roarty -

This will probably get a lot of boos from Neoconservatives

Commentary Magazine: Is Social Issue Strategy Helping Dems?

Is Social Issue Strategy Helping Dems?: pThe Washington Examiner reports that Democrats are going to try to keep the Todd Akin controversy alive through their convention. At Powerline, John Hinderaker argues that this is the worst possible move for the Obama campaign: We can only pray that this report is true, and that the Democrats devote all three days in Charlotte [...]/p

If the GOP decides to fight the Culture War, they will lose because as more the GOP has moved to the right. The country has moved left on Social Issues.

Washington Times: MILLER: Obama or Romney? Libertarians Must Choose

MILLER: Obama or Romney? Libertarians must choose - Washington Times

Libertarians should vote for who they want which is Gary Johnson, as well as plenty of real Liberals such as myself who like him as well. And maybe Gary will do well enough to make a difference and be able to build up the LP for the future.

The National Journal: Coral Davenport: Storm Threatening Tampa Puts GOP Climate Position in Spotlight

Storm Threatening Tampa Puts GOP Climate Position in Spotlight - Coral Davenport -

GOP- This storm is just an act of God

Thursday, August 23, 2012

Richard Nixon Foundation: President Richard Nixon's 1974 State of The Union Speech

President Nixon's 1974 State of The Union sounds to me more like a closing argument. That he was trying to make to the American people in why he should remain President and not be impeached by the House and convicted by the Senate, essentially fired by Congress. By telling Americans where the country was when he gave his first State of The Union address in 1969 and where the country was five years later. And what he would wanted to do as President if he were allowed to remain as President. It was the old don't give up or surrender until you've thrown all of your punches and have shot all of your bullets approach.

But I think as smart as a politician as Richard Nixon was, he probably knew that his days as President were numbered, even though he still had things on his agenda that he wanted to accomplish, At this point he still had three years to go on his 2nd term and still had health care reform, what later became known as Welfare to Work, energy independence and negotiating a peace deal between Israel and Egypt that actually started under the Nixon Administration in the early 1970s. But with all of the evidence that was about to come out as it related to the Watergate scandal, that was not going to happen.

President Nixon was trying to make the case that now its not the time to remove the President, with all of that he's accomplished. And everything that he still wanted to accomplish for the country. That instead we should come together as a country and get together to finish the work of the country, instead of firing the current President and once again starting over and trying again. But that was not going to happen. By early 74, the President was fighting not just Congress, but now the U.S. Supreme Court. That ordered him to give up tapes that proved his involvement in the Watergate coverup. So his days as President were certainly numbered at this point.

Washington Times Politics: Tea Party Voters Lack Enthusiasm for Mitt Romney

Tea party voters lack enthusiasm for Romney - Washington Times

Mitt Romney is not with the Tea Party on Social Issues

Wednesday, August 22, 2012

FRSFreeStatePlus: AEI: "The Real Story Behind the Soviet Empire's Shocking Collapse": A System That was Designed To Fail

The Soviet Union of Russia, the Socialist Republics of Russia failed and went down for several reasons. But the main reason was that it was never deigned to succeed, the Soviet Union at its peak was a country of 400M people, today Russia is a Federation of 150M people, a Federal Republic. And the Russian Communist Party had this warped idea that they could have all of these very well educated people and be able to control them for their entire lives, be able to put them to work in the name of Russian Communism. Be able to hold them down for their entire lives for all of this time, essentially make them prisoners of the State and that the Russian Government would be able to control. All of this gigantic countries resources, perhaps the most in the World and still be able to compete with the United States and European Union, in the United States case a Superpower. Not just with its military but economy as well because of its Private Enterprise System. A country that still had bread lines in the 1980s, was trying to compete with the Economic Superpower of the World. With a military that was as if not stronger then then the Russian Military and thats just not going to work which is what Mikhail Gorbachov understood.

I'm not saying that President Mikail Gorbachav on purposed created a system in Russia that was designed to bring down the Soviet Union. But he wanted to build a strong Russia so they wouldn't be a third World country with bread lines and so fourth, that could take advantage of Russia's vast Natural Resources as well as its people. So they could not only compete with America and Europe with its military but also economically as well. And to do this he knew his people were going to need some freedom to make that happen and they got a taste of that. And saw what the West was doing and decided that maybe thats what they want as well and you saw Russian Republics breaking up, like Ukraine, the Baltic States, the Caucus States as well. State Ownership Socialism doesn't work especially when its combine with Communism. And once people get a taste of freedom, they tend to like it, which is what I believe is what happened in Russia in the late 80s and early 90s.

The Soviet Union lasted seventy four years from 1917-1991, which isn't a very long time for a country and a fairly short part of Russia's history. The Communist Republic in China has been around for a little over sixty years and they established Private Enterprise around thirty years ago and the Communist Republic in Cuba has been around for a little over fifty years. And they are now starting their own Private Enterprise as well, even Communists are figuring out that State Ownership Socialism doesn't work and that for a country to succeed and last. The people need at least a certain amount of freedom.

The National Journal: Beth Reinhard: Democratic Convention To Highlight Abortion Rights, Women's Health, Equal Pay

Democratic Convention To Highlight Abortion Rights, Women's Health, Equal Pay - Beth Reinhard -

If the two conventions don't give you enough of an idea of how different the two parties are, nothing will.

Tuesday, August 21, 2012

Basic Economics: Uncommon Knowledge- Peter Robinson Interviewing Milton Friedman on Bill Clinton in 1999

Source: Basic Economics- Peter Robinson & Milton Friedman-
Source: Basic Economics: Uncommon Knowledge- Peter Robinson Interviewing Milton Friedman: Bill Clinton in 1999

Milton Friedman, made the case that the economy deserves most of the credit for the economic boom of the 1990s. That it was really an economic expansion that started in 1983, when the economy broke out of the 1982-83 recession. But what he doesn't mention is that was that we had a fairly bad recession in 1990-91 and we had mounting debt and deficits, that we were supposed to still be stuck with ten years later. President H.W. Bush, essentially inherited the recession of the early 1990s, with rising interest and inflation rates as well as unemployment. That he addressed in 1990 with the first of two deficit reduction acts. That included budget cuts, budget caps and tax hikes.

Which President Bush got killed for by right-wingers in the 1992 presidential election and one reason why he got a primary challenge from Pat Buchanan in 1992 as well. President Clinton, inherited a large debt and deficit in 1992, an economy that was growing, but barely, with low job growth, high inflation, interest and unemployment rates. And by the time President Clinton left office in 2001, the economy was booming, with 4.2% unemployment, a falling national debt and the first budget surplus since 1969. President Clinton, of course doesn't deserve all the credit for this, but he did lay down policies that helped bring this about.

In 1993 alone, President Clinton got through Congress two foreign trade deals. NAFTA and GAT and a deficit reduction act, that had budget cuts and tax hikes on the wealthy. NAFTA and GAT allowed for more American products to be sold in Canada and Mexico, as well as more jobs in America to make those products. The Deficit Reduction Act helped to bring down interest and inflation rates, which lowered prices, so people had more money to spend. Which meant consumer spending went up, which led to higher economic and job growth.

The actual size of the Federal Government went down under President Clinton. Now the Republican Congress's deserve some credit for that, but that process started under President Clinton during the Democratic Congress of 1993-94. Its really the private sector that deserves credit for the economic boom of the 1990s. Business's and workers, but President Clinton deserves credit as well. The economy did take off in the 1980s under President Reagan and the Economic Recovery Act of 1981.

But that the 1983 economic expansion lasted about six years from 1983-89. And the economy started to slide in 1989 and we had a recession in 1990-91. The 1990s was a different period, because information technology took off, creating millions of jobs in that decade. With all sorts of new tech companies, with the internet coming on line in 1991 or 92, with cell phones becoming common at about this time as well.

Washington Times Politics: Mitt Romney backs Audit for Fed, Vows
 to not Raise Taxes on Middle Class

Romney backs audit for Fed, vows
 to not raise taxes on middle class - Washington Times

Middle Class Tax Hikes are already in the Romney Fiscal Plan

The National Journal: Alex Roarty: President Obama Has Significantly Less Money on Hand Than Mitt Romney

Obama Has Significantly Less Money on Hand Than Romney - Alex Roarty -

The President has been getting killed in fundraising the last few months

Monday, August 20, 2012

Tasty Peach Cobbler: Video: The Army-McCarthy Hearings Documentary

This post was originally posted at FRS Daily Post on Blogger

The West with the help of Russia wins World War II and agrees to give Europe the resources that it needs to rebuild themselves after Nazism and what Italian Fascists did to the continent. The West, America and Europe was now somewhat at peace. But in America and Europe you had this huge liberal democracy in America and all of these mid-size developing social democracies in Europe. Against this gigantic totalitarian Communist State in the Soviet Union in Russia. And the two dominant visions of the world because the Liberal Democratic America, versus Communist Russia.

And because of the emergence of the Cold War Americans especially those who perhaps very well-educated about communism became afraid if it. And were worried about communism taking over America and Communists running America. And that is where Senator Joe McCarthy and his allies and colleagues in Congress starting in the House in 1947 with the Un-American Activities Committee. And then in the Senate with Army-McCarthy hearings, emerge to look like they were stamping out Communists in the U.S. Government.

Senator Joe McCarthy becomes a political star very early on, especially as a junior Senator. He becomes Chairman of the Government Oversight Committee in the Senate in 1953 after Republicans win back Congress again. After only being in the Senate for five years. But his political skills at least early on and his power as a speaker gave him a following to move up quickly and a platform to investigate supposed Communists in the U.S. Government. And to look like the strongest anti-Communist around and to advance his political career.

FRSFreeStatePlus: The Daily Caller: HHS Secretary Sebelius: "Paul Ryan's Medicare reform Plan a Serious Proposal": A Real Reform Plan

Representative Paul Ryan's Medicare Reform Plan is a serious plan, thats not the question its a real proposal designed to cut costs in Medicare. By turning it into a Voucher System where seniors would get a voucher and be able to get Health Insurance in the private Health Insurance Industry. But the problem is Medicare would no longer be an option for them in where they can get their Health Insurance and no longer have the option of choosing one of the best. Health Insurers in the country for their Health Insurance, a Health Insurer thats designed to provide quality Health Insurance at affordable costs. That yes has financial issues but the way to solve these issues, is not cutting back on the services but to bring younger healthier people into the system. By giving them the option to buy into Medicare and giving seniors the option of leaving Medicare for a private Health Insurer, with the same payments that would cover their Medicare. Just as long as they have that option, which would mean that Medicare would have to cover less people in the future, as well as being able to cover healthier younger people in the future as well. Which would bring down the costs of Medicare in the future.

The Affordable Care Act already saves money in Medicare, cutting the payments that would go to private Health Insurers, as part of Medicare Advantage that was created in 2003. And returning that money to Medicare to be used to pay for Medicare Insurance, under the Ryan Plan. The costs of healthcare would go up for seniors, because now they would be tuck with private Health Insurance. And a voucher that would not cover all of their Health Insurance costs and they would have to cover the rest out of pocket. So the Ryan Plan is a serious plan but a seriously bad Plan to Reform Medicare.

Commentary Magazine: The Todd Akin Fiasco

The Todd Akin Fiasco: pOn Sunday, a six-term Congressman from Missouri running as the Republican candidate for U.S. Senate went on a newsmaker program and, in defense of his pro-life views, reported that doctors say the body of a woman who has suffered a “legitimate rape” will somehow contrive to prevent a pregnancy: “It seems to me, from what [...]/p

This coming from the Neoconservative Commentary Magazine

Washington Times Politics: Voters in 'Solid South' up for grabs

Voters in 'Solid South' up for grabs - Washington Times

Florida, North Carolina and Virginia are the only Bible Belt States up for grabs

The National Journal: Is Todd Akin Toast In Missouri?

Is Todd Akin Toast In Missouri?

Senator Claire Mccaskill should right Representative Todd Akin a Thank You Card

Saturday, August 18, 2012

Jeff Quitney: Barry Goldwater Speaks Out 1964- Goldwater For President Committee

Source: Jeff Quitney-
Source: This piece was originally posted at FRS Daily Post

The Goldwater Presidential Campaign movies might of not have been the most professionally made movies. But they were somewhat ahead of their time, because they were made by the Goldwater Campaign and gave Senator Goldwater the opportunity, 15-20 minutes on network television to layout exactly where he was on the issues and what he wanted to do as President. And to show Americans that he wasn’t crazy. That he wasn’t the person that President Johnson and his campaign were trying to make him look like. As well as other Democrats that were trying to make Senator Goldwater look crazy.

Because Senator Goldwater believed in things like individual freedom and personal responsibility. If I was alive and old enough to vote in 1964, instead of being born eleven years later, I would’ve voted for President Johnson, because of Civil Rights. That he believed individual rights over states rights. Southern Democrats as well as some Republicans in Congress like Barry Goldwater, believed in the opposite. And when President Johnson was against getting American Armed Forces involved in the Vietnam War. Of course that changed later in 1965. But in 1964 President Johnson was the peace candidate, but Senator Goldwater wasn’t crazy. But a Classical Conservative who believed in individual freedom.

This film of course is a propaganda film by the Goldwater Campaign. An opportunity for them to layout where he is. Get out the message of what they want Americans to think about Barry Goldwater. And not hear the other side, but this film does give people an idea of where Barry Goldwater was politically. That he believed in individual freedom and personal responsibility. Peace Through Strength, that his foreign policy of course would’ve been different from President Johnson.

Senator Goldwater would’ve taken a much harder approach to the Vietnam War and would’ve not only had sent American troops there, but we would’ve been there to win the war, even for Vietnam itself. Which I believe would’ve been a very bad mistake, because that would’ve left us there to occupy that country, similar to Iraq. But with a President Goldwater we wouldn’t have seen the Great Society and perhaps more of a free market approach to solve those problems.

I would’ve love to of seen a presidential debate between President Johnson and Senator Goldwater. It wouldn’t have been an interesting as a presidential debate between Barry and President Kennedy. But it still would’ve been a very good debate, because we would’ve seen both men as they are. Rather than how the media portrays them and Americans would’ve had a clear choice in who to vote for.
Jeff Quitney: Barry Goldwater- Barry Goldwater- Speaks Out: Goldwater For President Committee

Washington Times: Maryland Court Rejects Lawsuit Challenging Redistricting Referendum

Md. court rejects lawsuit challenging redistricting referendum - Washington Times

I seriously hope as a Marylander that there aren't enough Marylanders dumb enough to pass this Voter ID/Voter Prevention Referendum

Friday, August 17, 2012

FRSFreeStates: Progressive Economist Robert Pollin: The Full Employment Debate: How To Reach Full Employment

Progressive Economist Robert Pollin: The Full Employment Debate: How To Reach Full Employment

FRSFreeStatePlus: RNC "Serious Questions" Political Commercials: Trying to Paint The President as a Question Dodger

Looks like President Obama was in New Mexico or at least fielding questions from a New Mexico Radio Station. Probably the morning drive by show or a music hits show, not exactly known for Hard News, except for maybe the half hour or hourly updates. Every major market in the country has Radio Stations like this, big markets like Washington may have a hundred Radio Stations like that. And of course they were asking the President softball profile questions, like what's your favorite Mexican food. If you were a superhero and news flash for members of the Obama Bandwagon, Barack Obama is not a superhero, who can wipe out recessions with his superpowers. They asked him if you were a superhero but you could only have one superpower, what would it be. And he said he would like to be able to fly, which would be a great power to have if you live in a big city like Washington. With all of the people and traffic, just think of how much time you would save getting from place to place, if you didn't have to drive, you just had a super cape and fly over the traffic. All politicians get questions like this and the ones who have things to hide, like their Tax Returns, hint hint, try to get interviews like this as much as possible. This is nothing new.

This better not be the best that the Republican National Committee has to offer, considering who their Presidential Nominee is. A man who won't even live up to his own father's policy when it comes to Tax Returns. Someone whose admitted to paying 13% in taxes one year, who pays less in taxes then his own secretary or Campaign Volunteers, who most of them are probably not rich. President Obama holds Press Conferences on a regular basis and fields questions from the audience at his Campaign Rallies. Even in wing States where the people there aren't in love with him, people who are out of work, about to lose their homes, can't pay their medical bills. Whereas Mitt Romney probably doesn't even know how much he pays in taxes, maybe thats why he won't release his Tax Returns, because he can't find them. This is not a good road for the RNC to be on considering their own Presidential Nominee skips questions about himself.

Both campaigns will be throwing a lot of mud back at each other, they both know that the country isn't in love with either of them. And picking from them will be selecting from not a great choice and that they have to make the opponent look even worse then they may look. To make themselves look better by default.

The National Journal: Linda McMahon's Debate Demands

Linda McMahon's Debate Demands

Let me guess no negative questions for her during the debates and she can read her answers off of notes or something

Thursday, August 16, 2012

FRSFreeStatePlus: Mitt Romney Hits President Obama on Medicare: Mitt Must Be Talking About a Different Plan

It must be great to live in the World of Mitt Romney, where you see things anyway you want to and have your own version of the truth. Even if you are the only person that sees that truth or perhaps people dumb enough to buy your snake oil or used Ford Pinto's or Ford Chevy Chevette's. Maybe I'll visit Mitt World the next time a need a break from reality and I'm out of pot. I just heard Mitt talk about what he saw as President Obama's Medicare Plan, the one that was part of the 2010 Affordable Care Act. Perhaps now known better as Romney/Obamacare, since Mitt Romney endorsed this plan. Again last week, after he spent a year running away from his own Healthcare Law that he signed as Governor of Massachusetts back in 2005 or 2006. He was for his own Healthcare Law, before he was against it, before he was for it again, watching Mitt Romney the politician. Is like watching a tennis match, ball bouncing back and fourth, not sure where its going to land and stay. Governor Romney what is your position on issue a, I don't know I haven't taken a poll on that yet. That's Mitt Romney's politics, what do I have to say to get elected and what do I have to say against my opponent to make them look as bad as I can. Before voters wake up and realize I'm a fraud and a wannabe career politician whose never been good enough at politics to hold an office for a long period of time.

The truth about the Affordable Care Act or Romney/Obamacare, is that it limits payments to the Health Insurance Industry and puts that money back into Medicare. Where it belongs thats been paid for by anyone whose ever had a job in America after 1965 and uses that money to pay for Medicare Advantage. The Prescription Drug Benefit that was passed in the middle of a Friday Night back in November of 2003. Because House Republicans didn't have enough votes to pass that law going in and spent hours after the debate had already concluded. Stiff arming House Republicans to vote for that bill, a bill these Republicans knew was a bad idea. Because it expanded an Entitlement Program, something they probably wouldn't of voted for when it was originally passed. And borrowed 500B$ to pay for Prescription Drugs, what the President did was fully fund Medicare Advantage.

What the Ryan Plan, well I guess its now the Romney/Ryan Plan does with Medicare, is force seniors by 2023. Out of Medicare, whether they want to leave it or not. Paul Ryan still will not be eligible for Medicare at that point, so even if this plan were to become law. And John Boehner married Harry Reid, about the same odds. Paul Ryan would still have about twelve years to fix it. Before he became eligible for Medicare.

The National Journal: Pennsylvania's Voter ID Law Is Unconstitutional - Garrett Epps, The Atlantic -

Pennsylvania's Voter ID Law Is Unconstitutional - Garrett Epps, The Atlantic -

The Pennsylvania Democratic Voter Prevention Action of 2012

Washington Times: MOLLOHAN AND KEENE: Left and right agree on criminal justice reforms - Washington Times

MOLLOHAN AND KEENE: Left and right agree on criminal justice reforms - Washington Times

Locking criminals up just to lock them up, doesn't solve the problem if they leave prison with the same skills that they have going into prison.

Wednesday, August 15, 2012

US News & World Report: Video: Simon Owens & Lauren Fox: The Differences Between Paul Ryan & Ayn Rand

I'm not going to say that Representative Paul Ryan is a Culture Warrior Big Government Republican, At least not in the mold of a Rick Santorum. I don't believe he is and I don't know enough about him to say that anyway. But Paul Ryan's respect for Ayn Rand has to do with her beliefs as it relates to economics. Ayn Rand was a Objectivist/Libertarian. Didn't want government involved in the economy at all and didn't believe that government had the right to force people to do anything with their money. Which is kinda where Paul Ryan is on economics, but not quite that libertarian, but they both believe that government shouldn't be regulating the economy, but they probably differ on every key Social Issue.

You can imagine and if Ayn Rand were alive today and looking to run for office or was an elected official, she probably wouldn't be a Republican. She wouldn't fit into today's GOP. She would be seen like an outcast like how they now treat Barry Goldwater, or Ron Paul. Maybe she would be a Republican just to hold office. And live in an area, or State with a large libertarian population, where she didn't need the support of Neoconservatives in order to get elected and reelected. Representative Ryan, fits in very well with today's GOP, except that he doesn't push social issues very much if at all. Neither does Mitt Romney, which could hurt this ticket with Neoconservatives in the fall, in States like Virginia, Ohio and Florida.

But Mitt, pretty much votes the party line. Republicans like talking about Ayn Rand and telling people how much they respect her. But its only economics they talk about when it comes to Ayn Rand. They don't believe in her philosophy of Freedom of Choice essentially. That people have the right to live their own lives as they see fit. That government shouldn't interfere with how people live their own lives. Instead they believe that government should establish some type of moral code in how Americans should live. And live up to their ideals of what Americans should be and all of that. And thats just not Ayn Rand and hopefully not Paul Ryan either.

I wish even as a Liberal Democrat that people like Barry Goldwater and Ayn Rand had more influence on today's Republican Party. Then they would be a real party of ideas, that didn't believe it needed to prevent people from voting, just because they believe they wouldn't vote Republican. Which is what Voter ID is all about. But this is still Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson's GOP, a Neoconservative Big Government party.

Tuesday, August 14, 2012

Richard Nixon Foundation: President Richard Nixon's 1972 State of The Union Address

President Richard Nixon's foreign policy I believe was very clear and yet brilliant. That the United States would be the Democratic leader of the world. Not that we would try to run all of the democracies around the world, but that we would layout the vision of what liberal democracy looks like and what we mean by liberal democracy. And yes our liberal values. Sorry Conservatives, deal with it. And that we would even work with authoritarian states, like the Soviet Union, People's Republic of China, authoritarian arab states, the Persian Kingdom in Iran, before they became the Islamic Republic.

We would work with those states as well where we could so we could influence them. Especially their people and show them there's another way of living and it's called freedom. But we would also work with these states to insure peace and freedom around the world where we could. That's why President Nixon went to Russia and China and that's why he negotiated nuclear arms treaties with Russia. And that America couldn't defend the free world by itself. That Europe had to play their role as well, instead of Americans having to pay for and do most of the work. That's what you hear in this 1972 State of The Union address.

What President Nixon also talked about was the need for what the Nixon Administration called revenue sharing. Which is an approach that Libertarian presidential nominee Gary Johnson is pushing and something that Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney also agrees with. Remember, President Nixon inherited the Great Society from President Lyndon Johnson, to go along with the New Deal. From President Franklin Roosevelt thirty-years earlier. And he didn't run for president in 1968 to eliminate the New Deal or Great Society. He knew he would've never gotten that out of a Democratic Congress.

And perhaps President Nixon didn't believe in eliminating the New Deal and Great Society  to begin with. But he wanted to find a way to make these programs as successful as possible, to make them as cost-effective and as efficient as possible. And he believed that empowering state and local government's was the best way to accomplish this by having them run them, with resources from the Federal Government. When it comes to policy, President Nixon is mostly known as a foreign policy President, for what he accomplished there. And even though foreign policy was the strongest interest he had, perhaps from being Vice President for eight years under President Eisenhower, it wasn't his only interest. And the only area that he wanted to work on. And he had a vision for domestic policy as well, but ran out of time to accomplish that because of the Watergate scandal.

Saturday, August 11, 2012

Bill McCune: Barry Goldwater- An American Life

Source: Bill McCune-
Source: This piece was originally posted at FRS Daily Post

Anyone whose not as familiar with American Conservatism as much as they would like to be and would like to learn more about American Conservatism, I have some suggestions on how to do that. Stop watching Fox News or using it as a main source of info, because it’s really mostly neoconservative commentary. And don’t read publications that claim to be Conservative but are really Neoconservative. Big Government Republicanism, like Commentary or Human Events. Unless you are interested in neoconservatism. But if you are really interested in learning about American Conservatism, research Barry Goldwater because that’s what it’s about. Read the book Conscience of a Conservative that was written by Senator Goldwater in 1960. That book lays out the conservative vision for America.

American Conservatism is about freedom and Americans being able to live independently of the state, especially the Federal Government. As far as being able to pay our own bills, our living expense and so forth. And that Americans should be able to live their own lives as they see fit as long as we are not hurting innocent people with what we are doing. Senator Goldwater even believed in the right to collectively bargain, just as long as workers weren’t forced to join labor unions. Barry Goldwater’s politics didn’t change as some Republicans and others have charged today. The Republican Party has changed to the point that Senator Goldwater couldn’t win the Republican nomination for President today.

Thats how far to the Right the party has moved. When Senator Goldwater left Congress in 1987, the Republican Party was still the Conservative Party in America. Now it’s probably the farthest right party that we have in America and that’s different. Barry probably could win the Libertarian Party presidential nomination. Even though they probably wouldn’t of liked his foreign policy views. Senator Goldwater wasn’t an isolationist, but other than that he would’ve fit in very well with the LP. And they would’ve taken him. But the Religious-Right would’ve tried to kick Senator Goldwater, Mr. Conservative out of the GOP.

Barry was a real Conservative. Senator Goldwater wasn’t interested in things like homosexuality and pornography, he had a gay grandson. And his famous line about Gays in the military, was that he didn’t care if soldiers were gay or straight, but could they shoot straight. He also said that the religion doesn’t belong in politics as it relates to policy and that abortion isn’t a political issue. But freedom of choice issue. And that he didn’t want Big Government in his wallet or bedroom. All reasons why he wouldn’t fit into the Republican Party today.
Bill McCune: Barry Goldwater- An American Life

FRSFreeStatePlus: Mitt Romney VP Announcement with Rep. Paul Ryan: How Paul Ryan Changes The Presidential Election

Before I get far into this selection, I just want to layout how I feel about Representative Paul Ryan the next Republican Vice Presidential Nominee. Who will of course run with Mitt Romney, that as a Liberal Democrat I actually like Representative Ryan and here's why, even though we agree on almost nothing. When it comes to policy but I like Paul Ryan, because of his style of debate, that he makes debating about the issues and uses the facts that best represents his side, as well as it can be done. And that he's the best Republican Spokesmen when it comes to the economy and Fiscal Policy and that he's a pretty honest guy and is above making debates personal. He attacks Democrats when it comes to policies, rather then making those attacks personal and doesn't question motives. At least not as much as the more partisan Republicans, especially from the Tea Party and personally he's a very likable charming guy who can connect with average people. Drink beer, watch ballgames, talk about music and movies, all things that Mitt Romney struggles to do, as badly as a fish that would struggle to walk. So in this sense Paul Ryan balances out Mitt Romney. Paul Ryan knows what he does for a living, how much money he made last year, how much he paid in taxes and how much things that people need cost. All things that Mitt Romney probably doesn't know.

So here are the plus's of Paul Ryan, he's a real Economic Conservative, in the sense that he truly believes in Economic Freedom. Except for maybe when it comes to Collective Bargaining but we'll see later and low taxes, limiting the Federal Government and so fourth. So in this sense he'll appeal to the Tea Party. Here are the minus's of and I'll start with the Republican Party first, like Mitt Romney Paul Ryan is not a Cultural Warrior, not interested in telling Americans he we should live. He doesn't push Social Issues at all, he's not a Big Government Republican and will reenforce those weakness's that Mitt Romney has with the Religious Right. Rick Santorum would've solved those problems for Mitt but would've created a flood of many other problems, which is why he wasn't selected. The problems that Paul Ryan creates for Independent Voters, can be summed up in three words, the Ryan Plan, especially as it relates to Medicare.

As a Democrat I'm glad Mitt Romney selected Paul Ryan who from a Democratic point of view, is the best non Cultural Warrior that they could've selected. And now we'll be able to tie Mitt to not only Paul Ryan but the Ryan Plan and if I'm the Obama Campaign. I'm running adds right now in Wisconsin, Representative Ryan's home State about the Ryan Plan and making the case that it would end Medicare as we know it. Because thats exactly what it would do for people under 56 once they are eligible for Medicare by forcing into the private Health Insurance Industry with a voucher. Thats not as much as Medicare, this could really hurt Romney/Ryan with Independents in the Midwest and Florida. Selecting Paul Ryan tells me that Mitt knows he's definitely behind now, somewhere between 5-10 points and that he needed to complete a long pass to get back in the game. But the problem with long passes is that they are low percentage and get picked off, which is what Democrats will be trying to do.

Here are the risks with Paul Ryan, 42, has spent most if not all of his entire professional life in Washington. Working in Congress, a Washington Insider, little to no Foreign Policy experience except how it relates to the Defense Budget as Chairman of the Budget Committee. Never been an Executive at any level, never really ran anything other then the House Budget Committee, for now eighteen months, before that Ranking Member of that committee was his biggest job. Gives a great speech about the economy but no experience in the Private Sector running or managing a business. So he brings a lot of baggage for Mitt Romney that Mitt didn't have before that they will have to deal with, because Democrats will keep reminding voters about it.

Friday, August 10, 2012

FRSFreeStatePlus: 100 million now on Federal Welfare: Why Right Wing Criticism of President Obama is not Credible

Its a little deceiving to blame President Obama for all the problems that country faces today. When all of the problems were already here when he became President three and half years ago. And then say look we told you so Obamanomics of whatever Right Wingers call it is not working, America is going to Hell with all of these problems. That President Obama has created, especially when all of these problems happened when Barack Obama even became President. The "Great Recession" is the cause of all of these new people that we now have in poverty today, I'm not talking about the people in poverty. And collecting from Public Assistance when the economy was fairly good, growing steadily, Economic and Job Growth etc. But the people who are educated and Middle Class just four years ago and now are on Public Assistance and perhaps even living in poverty. Out of work, lost all of their savings because of the Wall Street crash in 2008, those things didn't happen under President Obama but under President Bush. Along with the "Great Recession", President Obama inherited these problems instead, he inherited the mess of the previous Administration which he's been trying to deal with.

To put the problems of the economy on President Obama a situation he didn't create, is like crashing a car. Then selling it to someone with all of the damage thats been done to the car, sell the car before you repair it, lets say you are a real Slick Salesperson, a Used Care Salesperson if that. The person you just sold the car to now owns it and you blame them someone you've never seen or even ran into before, for damaging the car. Thats what its like to hear Right Wingers bash President Obama about the economy today, they are trying to put the blame on him. For problems that happened during the previous Administration, which aren't problems the President created, just trying to deal with as President. Which is unfair, of course life can be unfair but what would be fair for Republicans to talk about is how the Obama Administration is dealing with the problems that they inherited. Which would be fair game.

The way to move people out of poverty, especially uneducated people or people who are educated but had a job that no longer exists for anyone. Is through Job Training and Job Placement while they are on Public Assistance, thats how you save money on Public Assistance. By moving people off of it and into the workforce, not by kicking them off and telling them they are on their own. Or allowing them to collect from it indefinitely but by putting them to work and having them pay into the programs they were collecting from.

Thursday, August 9, 2012

Chuck Phillips: Gerald R. Ford Speech on Assuming The Presidency in 1974

On August, 9th 1974 Gerald R. Ford who was Vice President of the United States up until assuming the Presidency, assumed the Presidency of the United States. A job he never wanted or campaigned for prior to becoming president. Gerry Ford's big goal in politics was to be Speaker of the House of Representatives. A job as Minority Leader of the House of Representatives from 1965-73, came within twenty seats or so, after running for Speaker five times. He didn't want to be Vice President either, he got that job after Vice President Spiro Agnew resigned in 1973 due to a corruption scandal of his own.

Then Minority Leader Ford, was appointed Vice President in 1973 to replace Spiro Agnew, because House Speaker Carl Albert and Senate Leader Mike Mansfield, both Democrats both told President Nixon that Ford had the most votes and trust of any Republican in Congress. And would be someone that both Democrats and Republicans would vote to confirm in both the House and Senate. As he was confirmed by both the House and Senate overwhelmingly for Vice President in December 1973. And as it turns out Gerry Ford was the right choice if not best choice to be Vice President, because of his credibility with Congress and the country.

When Gerry Ford became Vice President in 1973, both Democrats knew that he was going to be the next President of the United States. As well as the media, because they all knew that Richard Nixon's days as President were numbered, that he wouldn't finish out his term as President. And what was about to come down and came down in 1974 in the Watergate scandal points that out perfectly. So appointing Ford as Vice President, President Nixon also probably knew or believed that he was appointing the next President of the United States as well.

Tuesday, August 7, 2012

Stockton, California Went Bankrupt. Is Your City Next?: Why People Should Pay For The Government They Need and No More

Stocton, California not a large city at least by American standards, this is not San Francisco, Los Angeles or New York or anywhere like that. But the largest city to date to file for bankruptcy, a city of roughly 300K people and this for lots of reasons. The "Great Recession" is certainly part of that, with the lost of jobs, Personal Income and Savings, resulting in falling Tax Revenue. Thats certainly a big part of that but what happened in Stocton, has happened to the State of California as a whole, which is Californians demanding more government then they are willing to pay for. This is a classic case of Borrow and Spend Economics, which is more common in the Federal Government. That politicians and others get what they see as the brilliant ideas and new ways to serve the people, with all of these new Public Services. But aren't willing to ask their Tax Payers to pay for them or if they even want them or need them. California is famous for referendums that they put on ballots demanding that the State Government provide these new Public Services. But they don't provide the State Government with the revenue to for it, which is part of the reason for their mountain of debt and deficits right now.

The good news is that there's a solution to all of this, its called Limited Government. Thats based around figuring out exactly what we need government to do for us, what it has the Constitutional as well as Legal Authority to do. How much will it cost and how do we raise the revenue to pay for it, which means we might not spend 40M$ on a new City Hall that we can't fill. Or 100M on a new arena we can't fill or paying Public Employees compensation and benefits that we can't afford or aren't willing to finance. All of these things that have happened to Stocton and are going on right now and as a result. Stocton is now laying off educators Emergency Managers, and cops all things that cities have to have to be a functioning city that people want to live in. I'm not saying that a Government Budget is the same as a Personal Budget but they do have similar principles. This is the money I have and this is what we can do with it and you pay for basic needs first.

A lot of Limited Government is based on Limited Resources, that there might be a mountain sized list of things that you want to do. But since you only have Limited Resources, you have to have a budget, so you know where you are financially and figure out what you have to pay for. Make those things as efficient as possible, which saves you money and once you take care of those things. If you have extra money you can look to finance things that you want to do.

Monday, August 6, 2012

John Birch Society: "Government Healthcare Always Leads to More Government Control and Rationing": What the ACA Really is

This spokesman for the John Birch Society has one thing correct, is that what's called "Obamacare" otherwise the Affordable Care Act is basically the same thing. As what's called "Romneycare", same ideas in both Healthcare Reform Laws, more access to Health Insurance for people who can't afford it. Patient Protections so people don't lose their Health Insurance without just cause, like they actually get sick or hurt and need their Health Insurance, no more annual or lifetime caps. As well as a Individual Mandate that requires that everyone get Health Insurance so we are all part of the system. And no longer have the ability to pass our Healthcare Costs onto people who've decided to pay for their Healthcare. And here's what both laws also do, they leave in place the private Health Insurance Industry so Americans can still have the Freedom of Choice. To decide for themselves where they get their Health Insurance, instead of government making these decisions for them. As well as the private Healthcare System in place as well, this is not Socialize Medicine, the Affordable Care Act doesn't nationalize the Healthcare System. Where government runs the hospitals and Health Insurer like in Cuba or in Britain.

What the Massachusetts Healthcare Law does for Massachusetts and what the Affordable Care Act does for the rest of the United States. Is set up a Healthcare System that they have in Germany, France, Holland, Israel, Taiwan, Japan and perhaps others. Where the people decide for themselves where they get their Health Insurance, just as long a they get it but where there are built in protections. So patients aren't abused in the system and so people who can't afford Health Insurance on their own or afford their employers Health Insurance plan. Will be able to get Health Insurance for themselves and their families as well, where government doesn't make these decisions. For us but where the Health Insurance Industry doesn't make these decisions for us as well but where the people have the power to make these decisions for themselves. With all the protections and info that they need.

For people to believe that Affordable Care Act is the Government Healthcare Control Act or something. Are people who haven't read the bill or are just lying about what they read and granted reading a 2000 page bill is time consuming and even exhausting. But if you actually read the bill and are able to understand it, you'll see that the private Healthcare and Health Insurance Systems are still in place but they are now regulated.