"Draining the Swamp"....

Warning: This will be a rant. I usually try to avoid writing in this style, but I can not hold my tongue on this topic.
This article will be consumed in anger and disgust.

Donald  Trump absolutely baffles me. His war cry promise to "drain the swamp" is now starting to seem like nothing more than a strategic move laid out by an evil genius. Not only is this cabinet set to be the richest cabinet of all of American history, but 'the swamp' seems to be getting dirtier and,even more so, out of touch than prior cabinets. Trump's picks range in various evils from openly anti-LBGQT, to blatant climate change deniers, and even creationists, just to name a few. His choices for cabinet positions are possibly even more terrifying than his intended policies. At least with his outrageous policy ideas Congress had the potential to stop anything too crazy, and it seemed as though Trump had been backing out of some of his campaign promises. However with the slew of morally corrupt, anti-intellectuals he is dragging to our highest positions, there is now a very real sense of danger. This colossal threat can, and most likely will, affect all areas of American life, as well as, the very Earth itself.

Maybe there is reason behind these atrocious choices. For the life of me, I have no idea what that may be...but I will cling to hope that maybe Trump is some sort of evil genius and he plans to fool us all once again by disallowing these cabinets from making any drastic changes. For example, one cabinet member wants to slash medicare and abolish Medicaid. Trump wouldn't really let that slide right?

All these damned Republicans,blissfully ignorant to having been duped by this man, all preach that we should give him a chance, see what he does, allow him to mess up first. What they don't seem to realize is that even if Trump screws up so bad that he's impeached, this cabinet will remain until the next election. These horrific men and women will have a very firm grip on our freedoms and our lives for a long time.

I am scared for myself and my son. We should all be scared. Trump never intended to drain the swamp. He intended to win, which he did. And now he can achieve an agenda that none of the general public knew about. This man and his cabinet picks are a disgrace, and an embarrassment to our country. If you have a God, I suggest you pray to it for the sake and decency of our country. We may not all make it out of this Presidency unscathed.

A Response to Mr. Romo's Article

I would like to start off by saying that there are some parts of Mr. Romo's article that I agree with, but then there are other parts that I absolutely do not. I very much agree that our nations debt should have been highly considered during this campaign. The candidates spent little to no time discussing actual policies, at least any realistic ones, and the media coverage failed to provide the american people any evidence of our candidates solutions. I also agree with Mr Romo's suggestion of placing more funding within our school systems. America is ranked relatively low in education when compared to the world, and a more educated public could lead to better policies and more informed elections. Also as Mr. Romo brought up, better funding in the schools could allow some great minds to develop and provide new, fresh ideas to better our Country. Now, I do not agree with Mr. Romo's idea that the current administration has left us in a "finical crisis". We are very much not still in the hole that former President George W. Bush left us in. Obama's white house has made huge strides in alleviating the finical burden we previously had. I also do not think Mr. Romo's accusation of Obama's administration focusing solely on healthcare and foreign affairs is accurate. While the majority of his work, at least what was most talked about, is in these fields, the current President has done quite a lot in all areas of American life. I do agree that we need to cut military spending, however, I am not sure how realistic this may be given the situations we have found ourselves in. Mr. Romo's argument that our representatives should focus more so on our country than on attacking each other rings very true. To make this country the super power we claim to be, we need representation that cares about, and focuses on it's people rather than re-election and advancement. The underlying message of Mr. Romo's article was very good, and I hope someday we will have a national government what truly works for our benefit as a whole, rather than themselves.

Obama's Legacy

I am sick of this current election, and woefully pessimistic about our nations future with either candidate; so instead, I want to highlight some achievements of our current President, Barack Obama. I am sure some people will disagree with me, but Obama has done some great things in his 8 year presidency. Over the course of his two terms, unemployment has gone down, crime rates across the country have gone down, we successfully pulled out of a recession, and our economy is, slowly, starting to grow. Gay men and women are now allowed to serve in our military, as well as legally marry each other. Carbon emissions have plummeted, and credit card companies can no longer spring hidden fees on us. Obama has done all of this, and I haven't even gotten to the healthcare reform or higher education.

Obamacare has, well, gone down in flames. It did not have the intended effect and many Americans are still angry about it. However, at least he tried. He tried to come up with a reform policy that would provide affordable healthcare to low income families. He tried to ensure our health and safety by being a 'dad' and forcing us to get insurance. He evoked his executive powers to push his policies through a Republican congress for the benefit of all Americans. Unfortunately this plan failed. Obamacare is in shambles and has lately caused more harm than good for many families; myself included. At least he tried, which is something compared to the nothing everyone else has been doing.

But, little does the public know, or care to know, passed along with the Affordable Care Act was also the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act. This was an addendum that allowed Democrats to weasel around the Republican filibuster and pass both acts with hardly any Republican votes. The important thing about the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act is that layered inside this healthcare reform was a section that would give a huge reform to the student loan program. The bill would allow a budget of $36 billion to expand the Federal Pell Grant, which provides funding for low income undergraduates, as well as a revolutionary student-debt relief that is quietly shifting the burden of student loan debt off of the shoulders of low income students and instead spread around to all taxpayers.

All of this is merely a snapshot of his domestic policies alone. Obama has done some wonderful things for our Country, but we have been to preoccupied to notice, or have focused too much on something we didn't like and missed all the other good and decent reforms this man has attempted. Obama was a great man, less of a politician, and more like a dad to Americans. Everything he did for us was with the best of intentions for all Americans as a whole, and he continued to work hard despite an entire Congress against him, and little recognition from us. Obama will be sorely missed once this election is over and we have chosen one of the two monstrous anti-humans as our next president.

Trump's Last Minute Plan for Student Debt

Hannah Finnie and Maggie Thompson,writers for the political blog site Think Progress, have co-authored a critique of Donald Trump's recently unveiled student debt plan. They start off by criticizing Donald for reveling his plan with only 26 days left in the election, accusing him of "...trying out another con on the American voters...." They explain that in a speech in Ohio, Trump proposed a relatively good plan, they even thought it sounded similar to Obama's reforms. Trump's proposal is to create an income-driven repayment plan that would place a cap on repayments dependent on the borrower's income. He is also suggesting loan forgiveness after 15 years. Although this sounds like a good idea, Hannah and Maggie are quick to point out that, "...Trump has said many times that he wants to shut down or reduce to shreds the Department of Education..." They note that the Republican Party platform even promotes the removal of the government from education. With this information, they argue that if Trump has his way, and eliminates federal student loans, students would be forced to go through private companies. Leaving the government to pay back billions of dollars of unpaid debt each year to those companies after the 15 year mark is up and the student loans have been forgiven. They declare that all of that money would go right to Wall Street as "...giveaways...." They also argue that interest rates would climb during those 15 years, from the 4.75% currently given to federal loan borrower's to 9.5-19% from private markets. This is especially troubling to low credit and low-income students whose payments, as claimed by the authors, could increase by as much as 78% over the life of their loan. This is assuming they were able to get the loan in the first place, as many banks would not consider them good borrowers to lend to. The coauthors provided a chart of how much more students would be paying over the life of the loan from each state. For an example, according the the table, in Texas alone students would end up paying $6,824-$22,744 more than they would with federal loans. I think it is really beneficial that the authors decided to include this graph because it really puts it into perspective how much damage this plan can cause students. I think they did a good job of not just presenting the facts, but explaining how they came to these conclusions as well. But Hannah and Maggie don't stop there, they describe how Trump, in a statement made last week, implied "...that he is considering the elimination of other programs to help borrowers, like Public Service Loan Forgiveness." They also call Trump out for using a discredited study to make his case to de-regulate schools. The authors declare that Trump's plan would only hurt students, and with time running out in the campaign, he has not provided anything more than "...empty rhetoric."

Hannah is a Senior Policy and Communications Associate with Generation Progress, and Maggie is the Executive Director of Generation Progress. Both work for the Millennial Engagement arm of the Center for American Progress. I believe this article is directed at college aged voters, as this plan would affect them the most. I find them both credible and reliable in their claims that Trump has created a devious plan that would have serious consequences for students. They offered not only their opinions, but accurate information and evidence to better uphold their thoughts, and I am inclined to believe them.

Neither Third-Party Candidates Deserve Your Vote

Washington Post opinion writer, Catherine Rampell, penned an article detailing just how unqualified the alternative candidates are for the presidency. Her opinion is made clear by the title of the piece alone, declaring, 'Both third-party candidates would be terrible presidents'. Catherine began by referring to some polling data showing how many young Americans are "...desperately seeking alternatives (to the main choices)..." , and about a third of young voters plan on voting for a third-party candidate. She provides quotes from President Barack Obama, as well as, Senator Bernie Sanders pleading with the American people to not vote for the alternates out of protest. Senator Sanders even goes so far as  to remind Americans that one of the two major party candidates will be elected, implying that a third party vote would be ineffective. She seems to be directing this article towards the younger voters in an attempt to sway their decision making during this upcoming election. Catherine argues that if these "underdog" candidates had a chance of winning, then by all means they should be voted for. However, she also contends that the choices we do have; Gary Johnson, Jill Stein, and Evan McMullin, are not worthy of our votes. She states that our options are, "...terrible, unserious..." and "...unfit for office."

Catherine then moved into the attack starting with Gary Johnson. She began the assault by pointing out his downright stupidity on foreign affairs and foreign policy knowledge. Using directly quoted evidence from MSNBC's prime-time event, wherein Johnson was given the chance to speak on his platform following the national debates. Catherine explains, "Johnson could not name a single foreign leader worthy of respect." She argues that his interview on MSNBC, as well as many other public flubs regarding foreign affairs indicates his, "...apparent disinterest in learning about the world around him..." and has, "...proven him unworthy of the presidency." Catherine makes a point to not only criticize his denseness in worldly affairs, but also his ignorance on current and past events within our own country. She recalls an incident recently, that when asked about the recent terrorist attacks in New York and Minnesota, Johnson seemed unaware of the dozens injured in those attacks by replying that he was, "...just grateful nobody got hurt." Catherine also mentions that in June, Johnson asked one of his aides,"Who's Harriet Tubman." She argues that his campaign managers try to spin his ignorance as evidence that he is "a real person", and while she agrees that he very much is an average person, Catherine believes that he is unprepared to be the president.

While Catherine wrote at great lengths to discredit Johnson, she makes quick work of criticizing Jill Stein and Evan McMullin. In her arguments against Stein, she points out that, "Despite being a medical doctor who knows better, she's pandered to anti-vaxxers; expressed strong stances on high-profile issues...only to abruptly reverse herself without explanation; and...trafficked in conspiracy theories, among other disqualification behaviors." Personally, I would have liked to see some of these points expanded on with the same detail allotted to Johnson. Least informative of all however, was her single argument against Evan McMullin declaring, "The most memorable thing he's done thus far in the election it to accidentally pick the wrong running mate." Again, I think some more background information, or expansion on the point she is making would be beneficial for the reader to make an educated opinion about the candidate. Catherine ends her article expressing her opinion that, because these third-party candidates haven't been under as much media scrutiny, Americans may "...think of them as the purer choices for the presidency." She believes that because of this, the candidates aren't "doing their homework" and that if Americans end up voting for them, "you haven't done yours either."

Catherine is a long time journalist of politics, public policy and economics. She has also won awards for her evidence-based journalism, so her statements are credible and reliable, and I for one believe her opinion is to be trusted and considered while making a choice this election season.

What Does Trump Mean In His Desire For A Nation "Under One God"?

NPR has posted this article recently attempting to decipher Trump's meaning behind his new favorite slogan, "... together as one people, under one God, saluting one flag".  The phrase "under one God" is disheartening to hear and has some groups concerned over its meaning. Trump and his campaign have not commented on clarifying such an outrageous goal and religious advocacy groups are worried about the implications that could arise if Trump is elected to the presidency. Barry Lynn, the executive directory of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, explains his concern that Trump might actually believe that being president would allow him to "somehow bring us (Americans) together by converting us all...." Other religious groups, such as, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), worry that phrases such as the one Trump is using, could potentially imply that certain types of Americans would gain priority over the rest in a Trump presidency. On the contrary, the CEO and President of the conservative Christian group Concerned Women for America Penny Nance, interprets Trump as "...a call for unity, a call for really understanding that we are a nation under God." However, for CAIR, Trump's comment goes against this country's moral code that "...you can have multiple faiths and still share the same ideal of being American...." They claim that using 'one God' "immediately excludes Hindus, Atheists, and Native Americans..." and that all Americans, no matter their faiths, have the right to be considered a part of this nation's identity.

This article is important because the separation of Church and State is a huge deal, and the larger America gets, the more diverse it becomes. To just assume that Christians, or variations of Christians, are the most important is utterly horrifying. As an non-religious person myself, to be forced to live in a world where one God is chosen to be the true and right God, and be expected to follow suit with others beliefs is absolutely absurd. As Americans we should be proud to have many Gods within one country. To bring religion back into politics is just ridiculous and unethical.

Welcome!

Hello.