Therefore, my writings which expose the manipulative con games of the post-
Reagan-era Republican Party is NOT a conflict of interest. I am not condemn-
ing the Republicans so as to endorse the Democrats. I can just as easily con-
demn the Democrats for their antics of the past 20+ years.
America needs an entirely new political system. The last thing we need running
our lives are politicians, being that they only do what it takes to get them elected
and re-elected. Your well being is not their concern, from what we have seen in
the past decades. They can be bullied by factions. This is not justice.
Plus, you must always keep in mind that there is a huge difference between the
Republican Party between and including the Eisenhower-Nixon-Ford years and
the Reagan-Gingrich-Bush II-TEA Party years. They are irreconcilable to each
other and unrecognizable from each other.
In fact, today's Republican Party still acts as of the Republican holders of wealth
are in need, while those in need are shunned to the point of the Republicans want-
ing to decrease and even end needed programs caused by the injustices of the rich
who technically stole much of their wealth.
Examples of the two differences: The Eisenhower-Nixon-Ford platform was
that of low military spending. It was the Joseph McCarthy crew which pushed
for massive military spending, but mostly for the nuclear program. Yet, the
McCarthyism Years were accompanied by American manufacturing prosperity.
Therefore, America could afford the McCarthy years and the Gemini-Apollo
space programs.Reagan was the beginning of the end of a healthy manufacturing
world power for the United States. Thus, America has been unable to afford the
debt-causing military spending of Southern Republicans. None the less, all that
Reagan did, when he re-ran for president in 1980, was adapt to the Southern Dem-
Of course, Southern legislators use the military budget as a jobs program for the
less-than-proliferate South, thereby getting into the South constituencies taxpay-
er dollars from the Northern and Western states. Republican southerners are
taxpayer leeches and sweatshop profiteer advocates,
Another example of the differences between the two recent eras of the Republican
Party is that Richard Nixon (an intelligent man) wanted price freezes and price con-
trols. The Bush II people such as Phil Gramm wanted prices to go out of control.
Prices did just that.
All in all, there is a huge difference between the Lincoln-era Republican Party, the
Teddy Roosevelt Republican agenda, the Eisenhower/Nixon Republican years, and
the post Reagan Republican Party.
Incidentally, George Bush the First could be categorized in limbo, being that he held
some Eisenhower/Nixon priorities, one Teddy Roosevelt priority, and one Reagan
priority. He was not the Evil Ronald Reagan, and he certainly was not the Son of
Satan that his own presidential son was. And for those unaware, George Bush
Senior was the CIA director. This means that he was not the drug store cowboy
nald Reagan was. Plus, Bush the First was in combat (in the sky), while Reagan
wasn't even 3,000 miles near combat.
In January 2015,the Republicans take-over Capitol Hill, and they will be making
Reagan look like a god. Know this: Reagan was inept. Reagan was incompetent.
Reagan was C student. He was never an attorney, never a professor, never a writ-
er, never an engineer, never a tradesman in any form of skilled labor, etc. He was
a pitch man ... an advertising voice. Nothing more. He was an impostor. He was
worse than worthless. He was destructive. He had no business being in govern-
ment. His greatest contradiction was him stating that government was the problem.
Well, if he believed that government were the problem, then why was Reagan in
government? To sabotage the government? To make the government a negated
entity without power? Well, his fruits are a matter of record, as in tripling the
national debt, turning America into the highest debtor nation when it was the
highest creditor nation the day Reagan took office, increasing the size of the
federal government, being in the White House as the Stock Market crashed,
being in the White House as the unemployment rate skyrocketed to 10.8%,
pushing for the Challenger to launch in deadly weather, even though his ad-
ministration was warned about the O-rings, making Marines sitting ducks in
Lebanon, etc, etc, etc. Let us proceed to a former candidate who tried to deify
The Affordable Care Act Crassly Called Obamacare
Republicans and Democrats can sit down and negotiate several amendments to the
existing health care law, but TEA Party Republicans want the entire law repealed.
Of course, the horror stories about the new healthcare law came forth, destroying
the credibility of several Republicans. In the process, it increased the absence of
credibility of Sarah "Bridge to Nowhere" Palin.
In her insufferable narcissistic craving to be elected God of the universe, the less
than elegant Sarah Palin attempted to make herself sound like the new version of
Paul "Masonic Lodge" Revere, by claiming that death panels are inscribed into the
Affordable Care Act. Instead of making herself look like the mirror image of Paul
Revere, she made herself look more stupid and more of a liar than before. This
was a great achievement, being that she already was branded the titles moron and
Anyway, the panel that was fraudulently misrepresented ... or misinterpreted ... by a
functional illiterate who was incapable of citing one Supreme Court case. Anyway,
the panel is the Independent Payment Advisory Board (the IPAB.) All that the board
may do is propose cost-cutting measures, should Medicare expenses start to rise too
rapidly. The cost-saving recommendations may NOT advocate reducing the amount
of Medicare or the quality of care. This is law.
Funds Excluded for Abortions
Concerning abortion, you must come to terms with the reality that there are people
of conscience in America who cannot bring themselves to support abortion, and
that this conscientious objection is neither a mental illness nor something limited
to a minority fringe. These people will have tormented consciences, if they sup-
port abortion in any way. In as much, the remedy was to make sure that private
insurers would have two premium accounts; one that takes into itself:
1} a major portion of the monthly premium paid by the policyholder and federal
subsidy dollars. No abortion provider is to be paid from this account.
and one that takes into itself:
2} a minority of policyholder payments. Abortions will be payed-for from here.
In addition, every company in the 'exchange' (in each sovereign state of operation)
must have at least one policy that does NOT provide abortion coverage.
Concerning the claim that the Affordable Care Act will make abortions cost one
dollar per abortion, the reality is that the cost for the rider covering abortion is
not to be lower than $1 of insurance premium money per month. The essence
of the Affordable Care Act is that persons of conscience are not put on the spot
when it comes to funding abortions with their tax dollars. The artificial contra-
ceptives rule is another issue and needs amended.
The Gravina Access Project
For the record, when America first encountered Sarah Palin, the first thing she
claimed was that the federal government kept pushing her to take federal tax
dollars to build a bridge to nowhere and that she said no. Well, this turned
out to be a complete lie. She ran on the platform of building the bridge with
federal dollars, when she ran for governess of Alaska.
The specific funding for the bridge-to-nowhere was amended in such a way
that the United States Congress included it in an Alaska transportation bill.
Therefore, Salin Palin got the money she claimed that she declined. Then
in the Year 2007, she cancelled the bridge construction project, altogether.
Yet, she did NOT turn the money.
So remember: Palin RECEIVED AND ACCEPTED the bridge to nowhere
money. In fact, she got money for TWO bridges to nowhere; namely for the
Gravina Bridge and the Knik Arm Bridge. It was included in a $286.4 million
appropriations bill for Alaska. The vote in the senate was 91 yeas, only 4 nays,
and 5 abstentions.
World renown USA Today reported on this and the invaluable factcheck.org
website provided needed details: