The Folly of Lines Drawn in the Sand

A number of years ago, a Republican who ran for and won  the Presidency, kept saying "Read my lips, no new taxes."  It seems a lifetime ago.

Several members of the House (read my paper) signed pledges they would not raise taxes under any circumstances.

Representative John Boehner is now saying the people want us to cooperate and work together, but he won't raise taxes just on the rich.

The twice-elected President of the United States agrees that the two branches must cooperate and work out an agreement, but he won't raise taxes on the middle class, seniors and students -- at least without a raise for the upper class.

Lines in the sand lead to -- do not pass go, go directly to -- a standoff.  No wonder we have gridlock in Washington, D. C.

Now, the man who drew the line in the sand with Iraq eventually went to war with Sadaam Hussein because he would not produce and destroy the weapons of mass destruction it was assumed he had.  After a huge shock and awe campaign, a lengthy occupation and efforts to rebuild the nation we had willfully destroyed -- surprise, they had no weapons of mass destruction!  But, once the line had been drawn in the sand, war was unavoidable.  It has been eleven years now during which time we have lost precious lives, limbs and minds, just because of the foolishness of drawing lines in the sand.  All this and the line drawer has lost face anyway.

Those paper signing congressmen have boxed themselves in with their line drawing.  Either they cannot vote for any compromise that includes a tax on anyone, or they will have to tell their constituents that they were lied to earlier.  The alternative is to let the whole country continue in debt for generations or go bankrupt.  And, by the way, adjusting COLA downward isn't taxing?

John Boehner, Mr. Bluster himself, is once again saying we must work together and compromise, but it won't be conservative Republicans who will do it. 

And you, too, Mr. President?  You'll tax the rich, but not the middle class even though taxing just the rich won't bring sufficient funds to reduce the debt enough?

All of you might need to take a leaf from President George H. W. Bush's book.  Learn from the folly of making unwise promises and erase the lines at once.  Then go back to the drawing board with everything truly on the table and everything negotiable.

And remember the lesson of Iraq -- a person can't produce and destroy something he doesn't have.  The line drawing was a foolish act for which we are all still paying.  The American public should not have to suffer more because our leaders act like school children angling for a fight.

The Morning After

Try reading the mind of God!  Is it possible to understand why, after the expenditure of six billion dollars in advertising, hours upon hours of American prayer and enough negative commercials to drive a Saint to drink, we wound up with almost the same situation we had before the election?  I'd like to try to help figure it out.

Some of the world's religions teach that we are sent to this planet to learn particular lessons.  Some even present that we pick our families ahead of coming here so that we maximize our opportunities to improve.  Others teach that whatever the reason we came in the first place, we are put into the same negative situations over and over until we finally learn correct and healthy responses to them.  An example might be always getting mean and hateful supervisors at work until such time as we learn how to cope and thrive in spite of them. 

So, keeping these thoughts in mind, how can we view our election results?

President Barack Obama gets another opportunity to defuse an obstinate House of Representatives and to motivate a recalcitrant Senate and to show the hope and change he promised as he moves us forward.  He gets to overcome his deer-in-the-headlights response to this dysfunctional Congress and assume the leadership role that We the People have twice given him the opportunity to command.

The Senate of these United States has one more chance to produce a sound budget that cuts wasteful spending while preserving worthwhile causes as they pay down the national debt.

The House of Representatives gets to forget ridiculous austerity and put on their thinking caps in an effort to devise sensible methods of paying down the afforementioned debt, including increasing taxes -- that five-letter, four-letter word.

All of the above absolutely must cooperate and compromise.  You are not playing games.  This is the real world and we are real people who need you to do what you were elected to do -- construct, tweek and pass laws to make our country better and stronger.

Mr. Mitch McConnell's lesson is that we want to give him one more chance to effect meaningful change for us.  We did not send him to congress to make sure Barack Obama was a one-term President or to waste an entire term in doing so.  We sent him to cooperate and use his mind for worthwhile things.  Besides he failed at his number one priority as well as on our behalf.

Mr. John Boehner needs this second chance to learn that the American right to go from a bar owner's son to one of the most powerful jobs in the land comes with a huge responsibility -- not just self aggrandizement.  He must play nice with others and get some good work done -- real work, not just rhetoric.

Eric Cantor, Paul Ryan and others of their ilk must realize the folly of politicians -- themselves, especially -- making political promises that cannot or should not be kept.  You are going to have to tax!  Again, that four-letter word, but in it's three-letter form.

And our President, whom some of us see as too willing to cooperate and compromise, is going to have to have more starch.  He will need it to stand up to the bullies in the other branch.

Karl Rove, The Koch brothers and the Super Pac big spenders get to learn that they can find more influential and responsible ways to spend their dollars.  How about using it to pay down the debt?  You obviously didn't buy our votes, did you?  And, oh yes, lying doesn't really work either, does it?

Mr. George Will, perhaps you are correct to some degree.  It may be necessary to have a Republican majority in the House to slow things down long enough to think and work together.  But, I am right as well.  This much gridlock is dysfunctional.

You all have a new opportunity to get this right and save our country from debt and bancruptcy.  Don't screw it up this time.

The Meaning of Our Vote

However slim the difference in the vote, the majority hath spoken!  What has the majority said?

Most of us . . .

. . . want to keep the Affordable Health Care Act

. . . believe in an individual's right to choose -- what we do with our own bodies, whom we love and marry, as well as other specific individual decisions

. . . trust the President more than the dissidents

. . . do not want the radical religious right changing our laws

. . . prefer a moderate to liberal approach right now

. . . are not impressed by scare tactics

. . . believe more in large government than small government

. . . can discern who lies the most

. . . disdain of political posturing

. . . want public education

. . . do not want vouchers or their clones

. . . want to preserve Social Security and Medicare

. . . believe in helping the poor

. . . want the rich to pay their fair share

. . . like that "hopey changey" stuff

Bring it on!!!

My Tongue-in-Cheek Choice for Congress (Or Am I Serious)?

Did you read Joel Stein's column in the November 5, 2012 Time?  His work, which he calls "The Awesome Column", is now the first thing I read.  If it doesn't make me laugh, his supposed intention, it 's sure to tick me off .  For example, the time he told us all he was smarter than us because he went to a better college.

This issue he was making a proposal that nobody should be allowed to vote unless they were at least as smart as he.  In laying his groundwork, he mentioned low-information voters, a term coined by an author, Samuel Popkin.  Stein consulted Popkin and some other impressive sounding people who eventually convinced him he was not a low-information voter.  By the end of the column, I decided I had laughed more than I had been rankled.  I also was evaluating whether I was a low-information voter concerning my most difficult choice this year.

What were the bits of information I had about the people running for Congress from our district in the state of Kansas? 

___________, Libertarian

Kevin Yoder, Republican

About the Libertarian whose name I don't remember, I know not a word.  There were no ads.  There were no handshakes.  There were no pictures on fliers.  There weren't even any phone calls.  But, I may have finally figured out a way not to receive any of the latter.

About Kevin Yoder, I have this sketchy information. 

.  He's a rather handsome man who wears expensive looking clothing which fits him beautifully.  Oh, yeah, that's probably not a good reason for choosing a public leader.

.  He's not Dennis Moore.  Now, Dennis Moore, by the end of one term in Congress, had sent out a number of newsletters and invitations to talk sessions.  He even got out of Johnson County for some of them.  He spoke of ideas that agreed with some of mine and seemed a good, intelligent man.

.  He's not even Dennis Moore's wife who ran for the seat after Dennis resigned, but sadly lost the election.

.  Yoder did send me one communication.  There was a multi-paged questionnaire asking my opinion about the issues he wanted to accomplish in his next term.  It was accompanied by a b. s. letter telling me that because of my standing in the community he needed to know my wishes. 

Let's examine my standing for truth.

1.  Retired
2.  Poor
3.  Female
4.  Democrat
5.  Single -- no spouse to influence
6.  Smart aleck
7.  Opinionated
8.  Or is that opinionated smart aleck?

The letter informed me if I would include my e-mail address he would send me results of the survey in about a month.  I did, he didn't.  (And to think I gave him my blog address as well.)

I did hear about him one more time in the interim. He got his sorry behind in the news - almost literally -- for going skinny dipping in the Sea of Galilee. 

1.  In coed company
2.  There were other members of Congress there
3.  Some, including Yoder, had their spouses with them
4. The others wore their clothes

Now, for the above story I want to thank him for the laugh it gives me every time I think of it.  But I guess it does show poor judgment for a Congressman who wants to be reelected to behave in such a way.  Even though I'm sure Jesus, himself, may have skinny-dipped there a time or two, it wasn't considered a sacred body of water at the time. But, then Yoder may have been trying to save the crease in those lovely clothes.

Not to worry, Mr. Yoder.  I'm sure you'll win the election.  There were no Democrats running against you.  Your party didn't think they needed to run any ads against your opponent.  And the national politicians consider this state a lock-in for the Republican Party.

I was just h e double hocky sticks (remember me now?) bent on showing my ire with Republican dirty political tactics this year by voting for anyone else, especially Democrats.

Don't let my blog worry you either.  I can't get most of my friends and family to read it and none of them live in Kansas.  I'm sure you rushed to read the blog as soon as you received knowledge of it.  If you did, you'll note it says I have two followers, but that can't be right, can it?  It increased from one follower to two one time when I signed in to do an edit.  My granddaughter swears she read it at least once.  So did my brother, the Republican . . . and my nephew by marriage told me I was some kind of writer.  I'm sure he doesn't know I realize that may not be a compliment.  My friend from high school, who lives in California, said she would read one and I remember her as a person of her word.  My other brother, the Democrat, after many excuses why he hadn't, reluctantly said he would, and he's a minister.  They always tell the truth, don't they?  I know my best friend's sister read it at least once, because her nephew filed a comment and said she had recommended he read it.  And then there is my niece whom I fired up so badly she wrote two rebuttal comments. 

But, I'll leave it to you all my non-reading followers.  Was I a low-information voter or not?

There was one thing of note.  Mr. Yoder said on the survey form that he was working to get term limits for Congress.  Fat chance his colleagues will go for that, but it is an idea I can get into myself.

Pre-Election Overview of Trickle Down Politics

A friend asked a person for information I needed for this blog. That person said he would like to meet and shake the hand of the individual -- me -- that cares enough to write a blog that nobody reads. It does seem that way sometimes, but I certainly have ticked off a lot of conservative Republicans with it. Some have filed formal comments on the blog. Joel Osteen said in his sermon today that sometimes we have to go through a thousand or so closed doors before we walk through the one that God answers with a yes, but we need to stay in the faith and keep trying.

This campaign has left a lot of citizens confused and frustrated. The died-in-the-wool Democrats and Republicans remain almost blindly and unthinkingly faithful to party lines. The rest of us have to keep listening, reading and evaluating. We also need to be prayerful that we hear and understand the issues well enough to make the best choices for most Americans. Believe me I have prayed my way through these blog articles.

Throughout the process, the blame games have grown very tiring and have not been constructive. Yes, our debt grew considerably because of two wars, tax cuts and an unsubstantiated belief that cutting taxes for the wealthy and businesses would cause trickle down affluence to Main Street. Yes, the current congress and administration colluded with the previous ones and continued those same questionable practices. What part of "they are not working" do both parties not understand? The best that can be said is they are leading us through a sluggish recovery.

Granted this recovery was destined to be sluggish anyway. There is a reason this period was called The Great Recession. It was named such because it is the worst recession since the Great Depression. We won't recover overnight.

In "The View From Mainstreet", the first article in the blog, I said that the average head of household knows how to fix a financial crisis -- at least as long as jobs are available. One, stop fighting about the problem and creating more stress. Two, cut out all frivolous and unnecessary spending. Three, increase revenue. In a family, that means people take on extra jobs. In government that means increasing taxes. If it means Congress needs to tax my $797 monthly Social Security Transfer, so-be-it. Tax it! As a neighbor says when we get no or niggardly Social Security increases, "we can learn to do with less". Whatever it takes, get that national debt paid down. It is sheer insanity to be in debt to a country that has clearly not been our friend for decades. The Chinese are no dummies. Are we?

Focusing on whether or not we like the personalities involved should not be the issue. After the Republican primary, I e-mailed my Republican brother that I'm glad Romney had won. I rather like the man. I simply disagree with his waffling on issues in order to improve his poll figures as well as his newly acquired conservative politics.

I understand why that brother is a Republican. He is a small business owner and Republicans, by orientation, tend to favor businesses, both large and small. But most of my friends and family, as well as myself, have worked for schools, local governments, serving or helping professions, and in other people's businesses. Democrats are the ones more likely to protect the interests of the little people like us. From them you don't get the feeling that they are saying if they can live on their $10,000,000 annual income and save for their futures, why can't we live on the minimum wage $15,080 and save for our retirements as well. Even wealthy Democrats have a better understanding of what it means to be poor or Middle Class. The Republicans seem not to care anymore.

In this economy of less than one job per working-aged employee, there are some conservatives who actually think that Social Security should be entirely eliminated or at least reduced to a state that it supplements our retirement jobs. There is a reason why the very young and the very old do not work. The very young are learning how to survive and the very old are trying use the skills they learned while young. Even people as remarkably healthy as I, still have physical issues that can impede productive work -- visual disturbances, hearing problems, arthritis, etc. How can they convince a prospective employer that they can be as useful and productive as their younger selves? Many of them need afternoon naps to keep up their strength or rest their eyes.

Remember that funny old saying, "them what has, gets"? Social Security recipients, while having an average monthly income of $1050 received no raise for 2010, 2011, a 3.6 per cent raise for 2012 and a prospective increase of 1.7 per cent for 2013. Supposedly our Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) is based on the Consumer Price Index -W. Having lived through the years 2010, 2011 and 2012 to date, can you honestly agree that we had no cost of living increase in 2009 and 2010 or just 1.7 per cent in 2012? If these figures are correct, why can we buy so much less than we could a few years ago. The COLA is supposed to keep us at the same purchasing power as when the Index was lower.

Yet, Congress, some time ago, allowed themselves an automatic annual raise unless they voted before the end of the previous year to forego it. Ordinary Congressmen have an income of $174, 000, but they need an increase sometimes even when the Seniors and handicapped do not. "Them what has, gets."

In psychology and education, we talk about a phenomenon called the "Self Fulfilling Prophecy". If we think something negative might happen, our subconscious is likely to set up conditions so that something negative happens. Well, the current climate in Congress is that Social Security needs to be reduced or discontinued so it won't go bankrupt or cause the entire country to be bankrupt. So what does Congress do? They stop taking Social Security taxes from employee's paychecks. And what are Conservatives threatening? Republicans want to privatize the program. President George W. Bush suggested since people would like to leave something for their children, he thought privatizing was a good idea. Besides the fact that private funds would be threatened over and over by a volatile stock market, how can failure to tax the current workforce for Social Security or letting heirs inherit the private funds save the program? Subtracting funds from an already crippled system will kill the system, which is exactly what some Republicans such as Todd Akin of Missouri want to do.

Next we need to address issues related to large and small government. Right after the Civil War, a Union could not have been possible had the states not been given a lot of power and latitude. The entire concept of small versus large government is kind of a dinosaur, but the country keeps playing the old tapes over and over. Per small government conservatives, there are a lot of areas where the Federal Government does not belong. For Mitt Romney, one of these is health care. He presented once that his State Health Care plan would be a good model for the country, but for each individual state, not the Federal Government. Well, what a waste of time, manpower and dollars to replicate it 49 times. And, would there be equal protection fifty different times? Can't you envision a mass exodus to the state with the most popular plan? But more importantly, doesn't this underscore a basic hypocrisy in Conservative thinking? The very party that believes that the less government the better, is the one that wants to micromanage our individual lives -- what we do with our bodies, who we marry, what wattage light bulb we use, whether or not we use birth control. Our God is a taxing master, but even He offers us a choice. Local, state and federal governments do not belong in our private and religious lives. Mucking around in them is evidence of politics and government out of control.

We have yet to hear the debate about foreign policy. That hasn't stopped people on both sides from devining what the policies are or should be.

A lot of my family is up in arms over our relations with Israel. Per our military leaders, our country still has good rapport with the Israeli military. From what I have discerned from my reading, Israel does not have enough manpower or supplies to carry on a prolonged war with Iran. If they go into battle with that country, whether it is started by Israel or Iran, they will have to have the backing and support of the U. S. and their other allies. It would be to Netanyahu's advantage if he could coerce all of us to start the war for them. Some of the other Israeli leaders, however, do not believe the time is yet here when Israel and it's allies need to act. President Obama and our leaders are well aware that two recent wars are the major cause of our never-ending debt and that our troops are exhausted and stressed to the point of suicide. We do not need another war. We need to rest, grieve and heal both emotionally and financially. But Netanyahu will not cease his pressure to get the U. S. and the U. N. to go to war for him. Through his efforts to achieve his personal agenda, he has offended our President on more than one occasion, including dressing him down in a televised photo op on his first visit to this administration.

In addition, Russia and China do not want military interference between these two countries at this time, and yes they have a say. Our government and the other countries have opted to use sanctions in an attempt to avoid bloodshed and achieve a peaceful resolution. Besides, Ahmadinejad said that Putin informed him we had several thousand nuclear weapons, and that one bomb would be nothing compared to that. But go ahead, critics and continue to criticize our President and the U. N. for not engaging in our usual guilt-ridden knee jerk reaction to Israeli concerns. Then the next presidential election you will be able to complain about a war of your own making.

Now, let's deal with the Libyan debate. CBS did a timeline last week about what and when the Administration stated that the attack on our embasy was probably terrorism. In a meeting with some of his staff, Obama is said to have stated it was probably terrorism, and he mentioned not tolerating terrorists in his public news conference, less than twelve hours after the event. If ten kids get into a fight on the playground, the school staff may believe, while stopping it, that they know what caused it and who all was involved. But if they walk into the fray saying they know the gang kid started it and take action based only on opinion, they could come up short later when they find out Johnny four-eyes stole a candy bar from a little girl and the others began to protect her. Wherever the fight and whatever the cause, sane individuals have to methodically sift through the facts, examine forensically and make sane decisions before acting. And to think if he had come out swearing vengeance for terrorism and it turned out regular mob violence, all the critics would have risen against him for that. We need to leave personalities and our favorites out of this and think forensically ourselves.

The uprising in Egypt seems truly to have been provoked by the ill-timed and ill-conceived video that a coptic Egyptian published on-line from our country. Nobody seems concerned that Egypt has taken responsibility for their own cleanup.

The situation in Syria is a heartache. Our government considered sending in weapons to help the rebels, but could not because there was no guarantee they would not be used by AlQaeda, The Talliban and their sympathizers. Just think, we could have wound up with another gun/Cartel expose for everybody to bitch about.

But the bottom line is that Ron Paul is probably right. The United States is not the police force of the world. We are neither obligated nor qualified to be. We have more than we can handle policing within our own borders.

We all need to learn as much as we can. We must discern what remarks -- from both sides -- are fact and what are half truths and what are misdirections, or downright lies meant to win votes. We need to honestly assess if we are cherry picking points to support our pre-conceived party position or if we are really trying to eke out all the facts.

It is imperative that we align ourselves with politicians whose records to date show that they share our interests and have policies that will facilitate our own financial and life-sustaining needs. It is ludicrous when a part-time teacher or a hospital nurse's aid identifies so closely with a member of the upper one per cent that they think their needs and goals are the same. They are totally in conflict. And there are 99% more of us than there are of them.

Which Mitt Romney Would Be President?

Should Mitt Romey become President, which Mitt Romney would we get?  Would it be the one who signed a health care bill into law while he was Governor of Massachusetts?  You remember the law -- it was used as the model for the Affordable Health Care Act currently called Obamacare.  Or would we get the Mitt Romney who vows to get rid of Obamacare his first day in office?

Would the pro-choice Mitt Romney, Governor of Massachusetts, arrive in the Oval Office, or would the currently pro-life "Romney for President" be the one? 

Perhaps we will get the Romney who said the next President might eliminate the Dream Act that President Obama enacted by Executive Order or perhaps the one who now proudly exclaims he has an ancestor who was born of American parents in Mexico.  Or better still, we might get the one who says this country was built by immigrants and even his ancestors were immigrants. Well, duh, except for those few of us who have native American origins, all of us were born of immigrants.

Perhaps we will see the man who favors giving senior citizens vouchers for Medicare and sending them off to fight the wars with insurance companies (but please don't call them vouchers, because that's an unpopular idea).  Or maybe we will get the one who now says we'll have to have a governnment sponsored option as one of the Medicare choices.

Just possibly we will get the Romney that doesn't want the government in Affordable Health Care because the government doesn't belong in what should be a private industry.  Or possibly we will get the Romney that believes in the afforementioned government option for Medicare.

Maybe we'll get the Romney that says to trust him with the details instead of the one we observe making them up as he does interviews.

Will we get the Romney who said that kids who want to go to college or start businesses should borrow from their parents, or will we get the Romney who now says educating our young people is important and he truly embraces Pell grants?

Do we anticipate the Mitt Romney, who as a representative of Bain, closed companies and cut jobs, not the one who says his Bain experience taught him how to create jobs?  Or, will the Mitt Romney who took Bain's profits from the top and walked away, leaving some companies to file for bancruptcy, be the one we can expect?

Will we get the Romney that wrote 47 per cent of the population off in a private meeting, or the one who now embraces all of us as best friends -- the poor, the pregnant, the handicapped, the middle class, the Food Stamp People, the people he cannot comprehend, the multitudes who are too lazy and selfish to live off the always too low minimum wage, and the ones who cannot find two or three jobs in an economy that offers less than one each? 

For sure we would be getting the Romney that wants to be president even more than a kid wants a candy bar -- so much he will say anything at all to get the nomination and the job. 

But what we don't know from all the verbiage is which Mitt Romney will actually show up for work every day.  How could we?

Voucher Brain Disease

by

Lou Hough

Unfortunately, the Republicans in congress, and perhaps a few Democrats, have been stricken with a dangerous brain condition which this author has coined Voucher Brain Disease.  The congressmen most affected -- the worst cases -- tend to be small government, conservative Republicans.

This fad, which follows closely on the heels of one where U. S. Citizens were labeled whiners by our elected officials, seems to imply it is essential that the federal government get out of the management of our schools as well as our health care for seniors.

Consider the school children first.  Suppose the government estimates it should cost a hypothetical $2,500 per child per year to educate each one in America.  Part of the point they make is they will be saving taxpayers money in doing so.  Another part of their point is they are getting the federal government out of our schools and resting responsibility with local and state governments.  The first is probably a myth and the second is downright dangerous. 

Why is it a myth to think that it would reduce taxes?  First, these vouchers would not only be available to the usual public school students, but they they would go to private school children as well.  Does that mean we, the taxpayers, would be paying for Paul Ryan's children to be taught Catholicism in their schools?  That has been entertained as a possibility.  According to sources, the Supreme Court would probably have to decide any congressional decision that included parochial schools.

It certainly means we would be paying for Mitt Romney's grandchildren to attend private schools. These are at least two classifications of schools for which taxpayers probably should not have to pay, especially if we are trying to save federal money and are cutting taxes to the rich.  Think for a moment how many schools for which we do not pay now, that would receive children's vouchers under the proposed new plan.  How can that possibly save tax dollars?   (Note:  Mr. Romney is said to favor similar plans for education as well as Medicare, but avoids the term voucher because it is very unpopular). 

Second, as any senior on Social Security can tell you, the Congress steadfastly underestimates how much money is needed to live the barest existence.  So, they apply this typical underestimate to education and the school districts find that it costs $3,000 per student.  Who do you think will pay the difference?  Well, you will, depending on how your state and local governments decide to handle it.  Options include the student's family picking up the $500 extra per student or state and local governments increasing our -- yes, you guessed it -- taxes.  Do state and local taxes to pay that extra cost any less than federal? 

Also, they will try to tell you that it is better if local communities control the educational offerings.  Education is actually one area where a larger collection of minds designing and recommending curriculum or teaching methods is better than a small local school system doing it.  Even large ones can fail their students.  The Kansas City, Missouri, district, based on student achievement, has lost it's accreditation and caused the state to have to take over.  It not only takes a village to rear our children, as once written by Hillary Clinton, the village needs to be the entire U. S. A. in this case.

Think for a moment what the country's insurance companys could do with vouchers for Medicare.  For seniors on Medicare now, remember that from the start of the program, our pay checks were taxed for Medicare.  Next, once we were old enough to receive it, we had to pay a monthly fee which is subtracted from our Social Security payout.  Then we are told we have to pay a deductible before Medicare steps in and that Medicare will pay only a percentage of the charges with the rest being our copays.  In order to afford our deductibles and copays we have to subscribe to a Supplemental Insurance plan which currently costs in the neighborhood of $200 per month in fees.  As most of the companys charge extra for older age categories, it can be even higher.  In addition, we have to pay more per month for prescription coverage.  Now the federal government, which forced us to pay taxes to insure our future health, wants to give us vouchers and leave us to the mercy of insurance companies?  Worse still, the very ones in Congress who suffer from voucher brain disease, want deregulation of all U. S. companies. 

If you vote for Republicans for Congress and the Presidency this year, you are voting for these kinds of problems to be visited upon yourselves and your family.  Remember that this kind of thinking produced the Ryan budget plan that has already passed the Republican controled House of Representatives.  Think carefully what you do.  One celebrity said it's like giving them food stamps to go and get an education (or health care).