Donald Trump and maga Republicans continue to allow evil ICE to use authoritarian cruelty against American citizens

Regarding “Houston protests over deadly ICE shooting will continue Friday,” (January 9, 2026) An unarmed American citizen, a mother, was shot four times and murdered. Her name is Renee Good.

In her death by an ICE agent, when her van was driving away from the shooter, America was shot in the heart by the cruelty, hate and evil congressional support of an authoritarian Donald Trump, who failed to support and uphold the Constitution and our citizens' right to peacefully protest.

Echo opinion letter published in the Houston Chronicle:
What will our elected representatives do❓

Like Senator Ted Cruz (who was born in Canada) they are more afraid of an elderly man who is obviously unhinged. They are afraid of losing their job where they are paid to pledge unconstitutional loyalty to the leader they fear.

When faced with the evidence of this murder, our Republican leaders try to rationalize it with flat-out lies. Are we going to continue to go along with this lying until someone we love is shot and killed by an untrained, unnecessary member of the "immigration militia❓”

What are we willing to do to preserve our democracy❓ Even people in Poland, Iran and Russia were willing to stand up for their rights.

If we don't wake up, our democracy will be put to death, and it will not rise again. Not for me, you, our children or grandchildren.

I am very afraid that we are like the frog that is being slowly boiled to death in a heated lab beaker. (Let's just call it what it is. The evil Trump administration declared war on innocent U.S. citizens.)

From Patricia Garris, in Spring, Texas (Harris County) 

God did not save Donald Trump's life and God did not take away the life of an innocent rally victim

As a woman of Roman Catholic faith, I am compleley confident saying that God was not in attendance at the outdoor rally in Pennsylvania, where Donald Trump was injured on July 13, 2024, while an innocent bystander was murdered.  

Scripture 1 Thessalonians 5:22: "reject every kind of evil"

God was definitely not present at the Pennsylvania rally.  

However, what was evident to many alert rally attendees was their warning about a suspicious person who was reported to police. It turned out the suspicious person was a 20 year old man with a gun who shot at Trump, killed an innocent bystander, badly injured two other people while traumatizing the entire audience, somehow escaped the police and, yes,  stunned the Secret Service personnel (who obviously seemed to act like deer caught in the headlights before they took decisive action to protect the shooter's victim). 

Nevertheless, Republicans who spoke at the Republican Trump Rapture Convention in Milwaukee, seem to have developed some kind of mystical understanding about what God wanted to have happen during the shooter's evil intentions, when he aimed his A15 style rifle at his target. Senator Ted Cruz and Senator Tim Scott spoke like they had first hand knowledge about what God intended to happen at the Pennsylvania rally. Well, just so they both know.....with 100 percent certainty, I know God was not there and had zero to do with the horrible shooting. God is not the motivator of evil. Sadly, the innocent man who was murdered while attending the event with Donald Trump was the victim who experienced the evil intention of the shooter- a young man who had a gun. 

Echo opinion letter published in the Boston Globe:  

Dear Editor: Thanks to the Globe for the fascinating article by Emma Platoff and Jim Puzzanghera about the religious zeal and insane rapture atmosphere (ie, my editorial comment), at the Republican Convention (“For the faithful, it’s greatest story ever,” Page A1, July 17). 

Aenators Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Tim Scott (R-Florida) in speeches ascribe Donald Trump’s escape from death by an AR-15-style rifle to the deity, who supposedly intervened to save Trump’s life.

Do Cruz and Scott and their audience believe that the Almighty also intervened to bring about the death of the rallygoer on the stage near Trump, who died protecting his family from the kind of weapon the Democratic Party wants outlawed for civilian use?

Have the Trump faithful noticed that the suspected shooter had not reached the age of 21? Should we be blaming God for circumstances of our own making? 

From Megan Brook in Cambridge, Massachusetts

P.S.  God did not save Donald Trump. An evil intentioned shooter with a gun was at the Pennsylvania rally and God was notwhere to be found. 

Guns cause preventable violent deaths of innocent people

Question to Senator Ted Cruz who believes the response to preventable gun violence caused by shootings are liberal "theater"*.  So, my question to Senator Cruz is to ask him to identify what "theater" produced these two preventable gun violence murders? 

Gun violence deaths due to road rage!

• Innocent six year old shot while sitting in a car seat in his mother's car

• Innocent baseball coach shot in the head Minnesota while driving with his teenage son in the car  

These heinous murders are entirely preventable!

An echo opinion letter published in The Columbus Dispatch, an Ohio newspaper, calls for "gun riddance". 

Only way to end gun violence is to take away guns

I’m still waiting for U.S. leaders to do something bold to stem gun violence, namely confiscate (perhaps with compensation) most guns in public hands. Exceptions could be made, e.g. certain ranchers. Allow no guns to enter the country. As lethal guns disappeared, even law enforcement could eventually do without them. Especially considering advanced less lethal subduing methods of stun guns, chemical sprays and lasso/tethering guns.

It is (Maine Writer- extremely!) doubtful Second Amendment writers who composed the U.S. Constitution imagined the destructiveness of modern day guns. It is archaic and should be amended.

Gun riddance would save societal costs of: gun threat responses, shooting victim sufferings, gun control systems, gun use abuser incarcerations and gun-proofing buildings. Guns belong only in museums as relics.

Until guns are killed, who’ll be the next accidental or deliberate gun victim?

Bill Allman, Columbus, Ohio

*WASHINGTON, DC — U.S. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, reignited the fight between Democrats and Republicans Tuesday over gun control by criticizing Democrats for “ridiculous theater”.... (Austin- American Statesman newspaper...)

Why would Donald Trump put forth this terrible and unfair policy discriminating to children born to military families?

Where is Senator Ted Cruz?  He was born in Canada in a Canadian hospital and his birth was paid for by the Canadian health care system.  He should lead the opposition to this terrible policy primarily because his esteemed colleague the late Senator John McCain would have been subject to this unfair, cruel and totally unnecessary policy.  Americans must kick Donald Trump out of the Oval Office where he is directing horrific policies that are harming our citizens. Children have no control whatsoever about where they are born!  Moreover, military families have zero influence about where their spouses will receive orders to be stationed.

Opinion- Children of U.S. troops born overseas must now apply to become citizens? That's ridiculous!

Echo by E.J. Montini published in the Arizona Republic

The Trump administration has decided that children born to U.S. service members and government employees stationed overseas will no longer be automatically considered citizens of the United States.

Can you imagine anything more ridiculous? Sure.

But this is right up there among the most ridiculous and cruel.

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) made the announcement Wednesday, saying that children born to service members and other government employees at military hospitals and other locales outside the country will no longer automatically be considered U.S. citizens. Instead, their parents will have to apply for naturalization.

Senator John McCain, US Navy veteran and presidential candidate (1936-2018)- born in Panama, while his father was serving in the US Military.

Arizona is home to thousands of full-time and part-time military personnel, many of whom eventually serve overseas.
Not only would this new citizenship rule be an unnecessary hassle for individuals serving their country, but it may have the effect of preventing the children of government employees and military personnel from becoming president of the United States, depending upon how the Constitution is interpreted.

Still citizens, but with limits?

The founders, under Article II, Section 1, said that in order to be president a person had to be 35 years old, to have lived in the U.S. for at least 14 years, and be a “natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution.”

Since there are no longer any naturalized citizens who were around at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, military kids could be out.

If this rule were to have applied in 1936, a future U.S. senator named John McCain, who was born in the Panama Canal Zone, might not have been eligible to run for president.

At least one member of Arizona's congressional delegation, himself a veteran, noticed this. Tweeting:

FYI under this situation Senator John McCain would not have been eligible to run for President. https://twitter.com/jaketapper/status/1166815383959085056 …

This, of course, makes no sense.

I know, not shocking.

What would be shocking is if Congress didn’t step in and figure out a solution.  Either that, or limiting the citizenship rights the children of those who serve could become U.S. policy.

Reach Montini at ed.montini@arizonarepublic.com.

Texas managed care fraud ~ false claims about providers

Dallas Morning News ~ Senator Ted Cruz alert! 

"Texas state government says it's cracking down on companies that don’t have enough doctors. It has told at least 16 health care groups, including Superior(Health), to submit plans for how they’re going to fix holes in their networks, said Carrie Williams, a spokeswoman for the state health commission."

“Having an adequate network of providers is a longstanding challenge for Texas that predates managed care,” Williams said in a statement.


Managed-care companies overstate the number of physicians available to treat the state’s sickest patients

By J. David McSwane and Andrew Chavez | Staff Writers

Marta Whitworth’s 12-year-old foster son needed antipsychotic drugs to tame the violent outbursts that doctors attributed to fetal alcohol syndrome.

When the boy’s psychiatrist retired last summer, Whitworth looked for a replacement within driving distance of her home in Kosse, a small town about 45 miles southeast of Waco, Texas. 

Because the child is in the Texas foster-care program, a company paid by the state must handle all of his health care.

A Superior HealthPlan “service coordinator” gave Whitworth a list of about a dozen psychiatrists the boy could go to — the only ones he could go to. But when she called, not one would give him an appointment within six months, she says. Several said they don’t accept Superior patients.

Off his drugs for weeks, the boy threatened a sibling with a knife, shouting and repeating phrases over and over. Then he had a mental breakdown at school, Whitworth says. He screamed, threw chairs and ended up in a psych ward.

“He was hospitalized for four days,” says Whitworth, a school bus driver. “We could have avoided it if a doctor would have seen him.”

Her family’s experience is a symptom of a much larger problem with what’s known as Medicaid managed care, The Dallas Morning News found.

The companies Texas hires to care for its sickest citizens — foster children, chronically ailing kids, elderly and disabled adults — have been vastly overstating the number of doctors and specialists available to treat them.

In their published networks, the companies include many physicians who aren’t taking new patients, don’t accept government-funded health plans, or aren’t even treating Texans anymore. And state health officials know it.

In February, we tried to contact every psychiatrist Superior listed as available to help foster kids.

We called the main phone number in the company’s online directory for each doctor and asked the staff if they could schedule a new-patient appointment for a foster child. Only 9 percent could.

In the end, we found just 34 psychiatrists across the state who could take a foster child as a new patient. There are more than 30,000 foster kids — more than a third of whom need counseling, according to state data.

In Dallas, just seven out of 119 psychiatry offices we called within an hour’s drive of downtown said they were actually accepting new patients. Not one was within the city limits.

“Some of these networks are really, truly a sham,” says Dr. John Burruss, chief executive of Metrocare Services, a nonprofit mental health clinic in Dallas.

Superior disputed our findings.

“We do not believe that the method you followed for selecting providers on our website is representative of the approach our members would follow,” said Jane Hardey of Marathon Strategies, a New York public relations firm representing Superior.

The state has done little to verify the accuracy of managed-care companies’ network directories, and when it has found problems, it has often given the companies a pass.

Nor have state officials addressed a primary reason networks are so limited: low pay for doctors and their staffs.

Meanwhile, many children can’t get hearing aids, or allergy treatments, or drugs to treat depression and mood disorders.

The state says it is cracking down on companies that don’t have enough doctors. It has told at least 16 health care groups, including Superior, to submit plans for how they’re going to fix holes in their networks, said Carrie Williams, a spokeswoman for the state health commission.

“Having an adequate network of providers is a longstanding challenge for Texas that predates managed care,” Williams said in a statement.

Meanwhile ~ Federal regulators require states that hand off Medicaid to private companies, to hire outside researchers, to study, among other things, how hard it is for patients to get the care they need. Since 2002, Texas has used a team at the University of Florida to do its quality assessments

In 2016, the group began conducting “secret shopper” calls, in which academics pose as patients trying to arrange doctors appointments. When the undercover callers tried to get mental health care through the state's program for the elderly and disabled, only about 1 in 5 accepted the plan and were able to schedule an appointment, according to public documents The News obtained through open-records requests.

About 27 percent of the doctors they called said they didn’t take Medicaid. The next year, researchers found that trend had gotten worse — 38 percent of doctors said they weren’t taking the government program.

But the state gave several health care companies passing grades for appointment availability. How? It just didn’t count all the doctors whose phone numbers didn’t work or who didn’t accept Medicaid.

Without those doctors in the sample, it appeared that more than 88 percent of doctors listed in company networks could see a patient within days or weeks. But in reality, only 14 percent of doctors were taking appointments.

Specialists are most likely to care for extremely sick Texans. For a decade, health officials collected data tracking how many of them, including heart and lung doctors, dotted the state’s 254 counties.

But the state failed to analyze the data until late last year, when regulators found large swaths of Texas without available specialists.

The state has no idea how many Texans can’t find specialists, though. That’s because the health commission never asked researchers to do the “secret shopper” study for most specialties.

So The News did its own study. We called a random sample of the specialist providers listed in networks for three managed-care companies: Superior, Amerigroup and United Healthcare. We made almost 300 calls and tested six key specialities.

Of the offices reached by The Dallas Morning News, 2 out of 5 of them said they either didn't accept the Medicaid plan for which they were listed or the specialist was no longer at the office. That suggests 8,000 to 11,000 of the 25,000 specialist listings would lead patients to a dead end.

Those barriers can have devastating consequences.

Velma Castillo, a San Antonio woman in the health program for the disabled, couldn’t get help from Superior when she needed treatment for bipolar disorder and schizophrenia, conditions that caused her to lash out at her family and disappear for days.

“Just to get her medicine, she would go to the hospital for two weeks,” says her daughter, Sofia Reyes. “More than a hundred times.” (!?)

In May 2016, after Superior failed to help a different patient find psychiatric care in the same county where Castillo lives, state employees called 33 different offices, according to state records.

They found only one that would see the patient.

Foster Children at Risk

Texas state health regulators never conducted a secret shopper study for the network charged with taking care of the state's foster children.

So, The Dallas Morning News did.

Reporters called all 377 psychiatrists listed in the STAR Health program, the Medicaid managed-care plan for foster kids, and asked if the doctor listed in the directory was seeing new patients. Almost 45 percent of our calls reached a wrong number, or we were told the psychiatrist was no longer at the office we phoned.

Telephone numbers were disconnected or rang in hospital emergency rooms or were answered by fax machines.

Seven psychiatrists listed at UT Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas were not affiliated with the hospital, according to a spokesman.

Some offices said they hadn’t accepted Medicaid patients in years — or they never did — including Psymed Solutions and Aesthetics, a boutique firm in Plano whose services include Botox injections and cellulite removal for adults.

Almost 14 percent of the providers we called didn’t accept Superior’s plan for foster kids; 9 percent weren’t accepting new patients.

A Decade of Evidence!

Network problems are not a surprise to the state. As early as 2008, auditors had warned that there were “significant deficiencies” with Amerigroup’s.

In 2011, auditors looked at a tiny piece of Superior’s specialist network and found the company had only 712 specialists in Lubbock, not the 1,554 it listed, according to state records.

Just last year, state regulators found that at least a dozen children in Bexar County — the San Antonio region — couldn’t get hearing aids. Superior didn’t have a single audiologist there.

There were hearing-aid specialists in the area, but state records show they refused to work with Superior because of “low reimbursement” and “difficulties in obtaining payment,” according to emails we obtained through open-records requests.

The problem could have long-term consequences, a state employee wrote in one of the emails: “Delay in receiving timely pediatric hearing aid services can affect the children's ability to speak.”

TERM: CAPITATION

The state pays about 20 companies and nonprofits a flat fee to care for patients. That fee, paid for with state and federal money, is on a per-person, per-month basis and varies by the severity of patients’ conditions and needs. State actuaries determine this payment based on what they think healthcare will cost, plus 1.5 to 2 percent that can end up as profit or cover unexpected costs.

Companies like Superior and Amerigroup collect a set fee per patient, a payment known as a “capitation.” They get the money whether or not the patients visit doctors. When patients do seek treatment, the companies want to pay as little for it as possible.

“These companies are looking for physicians who are willing to take a lower rate,” says Dr. Linda Villarreal, a geriatrics doctor in the border town of Edinburg who sits on the board of the Texas Medical Association.

“Therefore, their network is very, very small.

“Their process of denials is deny, deny and deny until you just can’t anymore,” she says.

In San Antonio, Dr. Armando Garza says many of the children he sees have gotten worse as they waited months for physical and speech therapy, in limbo because of what he called Superior’s “stalling game.”

“It seems like it’s to try to save money on their end,” he says. “The kids are suffering.

“I can’t see the amount of Medicaid patients that I was seeing before,” Garza says. “I had to slow down because they’re not paying anybody, and all of our time is wasted on getting approvals,” or appealing denials.

A Superior spokeswoman called accusations that the company is denying care to save money “categorically false.”

‘Strategic narrowing’

State records suggest some companies may be intentionally thinning their networks in hopes of reducing doctor visits and bolstering their profits.

In Houston, Texas Children’s Hospital has accused Amerigroup of deliberately cutting back on its pediatric network to save money. 

In fact, the hospital didn’t join the company’s network because the payments were too low, an executive wrote to the state.

Yet its doctors were being inundated with Amerigroup’s most fragile children as though they “had nowhere else to turn for pediatric care,” hospital representatives wrote to the state health commission last year. They also accused Amerigroup of “strategic narrowing” of its networks to save money.

The hospital continued to see severely sick children in Amerigroup’s plan on an “out of network” basis, a hospital spokeswoman said, because Texas Children’s employed the only specialists in the region who could treat certain conditions.

Instead of cracking down on Amerigroup, records show state regulators repeatedly gave the company a pass on its poor network in the Houston region.

Amerigroup’s plan for fragile children in the Houston area netted the company more than $3,400 per child in its first 10 months — one of the highest profit margins of any plan in any part of the state. Texas Children’s, meanwhile, lost $3,000 per child.

Olga Gallardo, an Amerigroup spokeswoman, blames Texas Children’s, which she says refused to accept the company's “fair” contract terms.

Nearby, in Jefferson and Orange counties, Amerigroup is responsible for 3,000 patients, but as of late last year there wasn’t a single ear, nose and throat doctor to serve them, according to state data.

The company is working to recruit more doctors and is expanding its telemedicine offerings, Gallardo says.

“Amerigroup is committed to maintaining a robust care provider network of more than 60,000 care providers across the state to ensure our consumers have access to high quality health care,” she says.

Uncoordinated care
One of the main reasons Texas pays $22 billion a year to managed-care companies is to improve patients’ health through case managers whose job is to help sick people and busy foster parents find doctors.

In fact, care coordination is the chief benefit cited by the managed-care industry’s lobbying group.

“Texans who need specialized care and services benefit the most from managed care, because the system ensures each family has a nurse or social worker to coordinate care and help patients navigate the maze of traditional health care services,” Jamie Dudensing, chief executive of the Texas Association of Health Plans, said in a statement.

“More than that, care coordinators work to get patients a range of services that go far beyond traditional Medicaid, including meal coordination, home modifications, housing, and transportation.”

But the companies haven’t hired enough coordinators, and those they have on staff are often referring patients to dead-ends, the state’s own research shows. A report last year by the nonpartisan Legislative Budget Board found that “most members in managed care programs receive minimal or no coordination services from their managed care organization.”

Worse, patients “with the highest needs often experience the largest gaps in access to services that should be coordinated by their managed care organization.”

For example, these coordinators serve under 20 percent of foster kids, according to several state studies, even as the state pays Superior more than $10,000 a year per child. One report blames uncoordinated case management for the fact that many foster children aren’t getting mental-health treatment.

For the quarter-of-a-million elderly and disabled people in Medicaid managed care, coordination is even worse. Year over year, more of those Texans have reported difficulty getting doctor appointments and more basic assistance.

In 2001, Jake Billingsley had a stroke, which blinded him in one eye and impaired his brain function. The 69-year-old’s thoughts can run wild, and he can’t finish basic tasks.

He used to have a personal attendant, a service managed-care companies are cutting system wide, The Dallas Morning News found. But for a year and a half, he’s struggled to get help with preparing meals and cleaning his home outside Llano, where the kitchen and bathroom are filthy, and dirty laundry is piled high.

Right now, he doesn’t have a service coordinator — and says he feels abandoned. “It certainly has pushed me a hell of a lot closer to death,” Billingsley says. “I feel ashamed, living like this.”

Staff writer Jackie Wang contributed to this report.

Follow J. David McSwane and Andrew Chavez on Twitter at @davidmcswane and @adchavez.

No border wall- help Houston!- Echo from Houston Chronicle

An Echo from the Opinion page

MaineWriter: Our prayers, sympathy, and support go out to all of the people who are suffering under the burden of Hurricane Harvey and the floods caused by the torrential rainfall amounts  

This unprecedented weather disaster has underscored the complete futility about following Donald Trump's cult, those who are calling for an expensive border wall to be built on the Mexico international boundary.  

In fact, Houston deserves and needs tax funded support.  

A border wall will only take resources from the money needed in the Gulf Coast, where much of our nation's oil refinery needs are located. Moreover, if Houston is ever to rebuild its infrastructure, the massive labor needs will require Mexican laborers.  

Here's an "Echo" of this opinion, from the Houston Chronicle editorial:

HOUSTON,Tx- Harvey is expected to be the fifth-worst natural disaster in U.S. history - just behind Hurricane Ike, incidentally, the storm that much of the nation never really understood but which was felt deeply in Texas and Louisiana. The damage from Harvey could total $30 billion to $40 billion, and that's before any rebuilding has begun.

The stunning scope of this disaster should force another major change in Washington: Trump must drop his threat to shut down the government in September unless his border wall along Mexico is funded.

This is not a time to disrupt federal services. The energy industry along the Gulf Coast and the communities that keep it running must be brought back to full capacity as soon as possible.

This crisis also highlights the uselessness of the border wall that Trump is so obsessed with. Republican Congressman Will Hurd of Texas has aptly called it the most expensive and least effective way to stop illegal immigration from Mexico - which to Trump's credit, has slowed significantly since he was inaugurated.

Texas senators John Cornyn and Ted Cruz have influence with this administration. They must use it on this issue. There's no room for both expenditures in the federal budget, which will still see deficit spending that Republicans keep promising to curtail.

This is a time to determine priorities, to focus on real-world needs and not theoretical options. The choice should be clear.

San Antonio Express News- opinion echo: Vote no to GOP repeal

San Antonio newspaper is calling on the two Texas senators to oppose the Republican health insurance initiative.  Please!

Republicans are abusing the promise made by Donald Trump to provide better health insurance coverage for Americans by creating a conduit to tax cuts for the rich while cutting benefits for poor and middle class.  Senator Angus King labeled this strategy "shift and shaft". 

Shaft the poor to shift money to the rich.  

Donald Trump promised to provide a better health insurance coverage policy than what Republicans are offering.  Instead, the Republicans are shifting a tax cut to the rich by shafting health care for the poor and middle class.

Senate health care bill fails the country

We urge Texas senators to unite — in opposition.

This bill is bad for Texas and bad for the country.

With the Senate poised to vote on the repeal bill.

To pass, the bill will require at least 50 senators with a tie-breaking vote by Vice President Mike Pence.

There are myriad of flaws in the GOP bill.

Texas Senator John Cornyn, of course, is, as majority whip, the No. 2 Republican in the Senate. So, his support for the measure comes as no surprise, as it is essentially Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s baby. 

Nonetheless, there are compelling reasons Cornyn should break with McConnell and the majority of Senate Republicans on this bill.

On the whole, it is similar enough to the House measure to render it awful. But that’s actually the wrong comparison. The Senate measure should be compared to Obamacare, which, by helping insure some 20 million Americans, reduced the number of uninsured people in this country generally.

The positives: Parents will still be able to keep their children as old as 26 on their policies.

And then it gets very bad after that.

Thirty-one states expanded Medicaid under the ACA to help low-income people get coverage. The federal government paid 100 percent of that expansion cost for the first three years, capped at 90 percent afterward. Texas was foolish to forgo this.

But the Senate bill would, quite aside from the expansion, cut the traditional program more severely than the $800 billion over the next 10 years the House planned, experts say. It would just do it more slowly.

More than half of Texas children are covered under either Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program, said Ann Dunkelberg, associate director for the Center for Public Policy Priorities in Austin. Medicaid, she said, pays for a substantial number of Texas babies born every year as well. 

And not as well known, seniors also benefit from Medicaid.

Obamacare provided subsidies for lower-income people to pay for out-of-pocket expenses, such as deductibles and co-pays. The Senate preserves these for two years and then ends them altogether. Higher deductibles will result, as will, consequently, fewer people covered. Also ensuring this: the Senate version eliminates the penalties for adults who don’t purchase health coverage, the so-called individual mandate. More than 900,000 Texans were getting subsidies through the Obamacare exchanges.

It also eliminates penalties for larger companies if they don’t provide affordable insurance to their employees.

Obamacare banned insurers from charging their oldest customers more than three times what they charge their youngest. The Senate raises that to five times as much.

As with the House measure, the Senate defunds Planned Parenthood for one year. This, no doubt, is just another chapter in the nation’s abortion saga, but the organization does not use government funds for abortions and provides a bevy of other health services that keep low-income women, in particular, healthy — and helps prevent the pregnancies that can lead to abortions. This cut is simply foolish.

The Senate bill changes the tax credit formulas that help people afford their premiums through the exchanges to make them less generous. This is puzzling. One of the biggest complaints about Obamacare was that, even with the subsidies and tax credits, costs were still painful for many. A tweaking of Obamacare could fix that. But the Senate would make coverage even more expensive in the long run.

This bill masquerades as a health care measure, but is actually a massive tax cut for the wealthy. It eliminates most of the taxes imposed on the well-to-do to pay for Obamacare.

McConnell is pledging an expedited vote before opposition can mount a public campaign aimed at senators. Our prediction, however, is that even after a vote, senators who favored this bill will face constituents’ wrath when they go home. And if this measure is reconciled with the House bill to effectively repeal and replace Obamacare, there will surely be a price paid at the polls for many of these senators.

But the biggest reason to oppose this bill has nothing to do with re-electability. It’s about ethical responsibility. These changes do nothing to fulfill President Trump’s promise of better coverage for more people. If such a monstrosity gets to his desk and there is no veto, this will just be another empty promise.

Forgettable quotes from Republican national fear convention (RNFeC)

In my opinion, Melania Trump's plagiarism fiasco, when she spoke the phrases from Michelle Obama’s 2008 convention speech, were examples of GOP campaign incompetence. In fact the Republicans are responsible for her fiasco. They don't care about fact checking or plagiarism, unless doing so pertains to intimidating somebody else.

"Your word is your bond and you do what you say you are going to do...." Melania Trump. 

I'm sorry to tell you this Mrs. Trump, but there will never be a Mexican built and paid for wall between the US & Mexico.

"Your word is your bond and you do what you say you are going to do...." NOT.

"When your essay is due in one hour but you didn't start it yet #FamousMelaniaTrumpQuotes"

"Your word is your bond and you do what you say you are going to do"....OMG, Melania Trump obviously didn't receive much consultation about her speech and the "ghost" writer likely never existed, but, rather,was a figment of Melania's imagination.

Another forgettable quote was in the repeated Pavlov Dog reflex descriptions to Donald Trump as being "a good man", made by "Charlie McCarthy" impersonator and vice presidential pick, Governor Mike Pence of Indiana.  In fact, Pence tried hard to convince attendees that they should feel good about supporting Trump, who he repeatedly called “this good man.” Nevertheless, Governor Pence never offered a compelling example of why he said Trump was a good man? As a professed Christian, how was Governor Pence coerced into telling such a big lie?  

A third forgettable quote was when Ted Cruz was criticized for failing to endorse Donald Trump, but told the "RNFeC" to "Vote Your Conscience", rather than endorse the candidate.  

As Cruz continued speaking, and the crowd began to realize that an endorsement seemed less likely, the cheers that marked the early part of the speech became boos.

Lies were laced like tangled threads into the forgettable quotes at the "RNFeC", especially about President Barack Obama, who (by the way) isn't running for re-election. For example, Senator Cruz accused President Obama of closing Guantanamo but opening US borders.  #BigLie  In fact, Guantanamo is still open and more illegal immigrants have been tragically deported under President Obama's administration than during any of his predecessor's terms.  So sad, but true and Cruz told a #BigLie.

In fact, Tim Rogers reports in fusion.net 

"When it comes to getting tough on immigration, Republican candidates talk the talk, but Obama walks the walk. President Obama has deported more people than any U.S. president before him, and almost more than every other president combined from the 20th century." Tragically true, but another in the litany of RNFeC lies.

Although the US Constitution allows unmitigated freedom of speech, there are ethical standards that clearly transcend fundamental liberties. Telling the truth, thoughtful expression without plagiarism and honesty aren't defined in our American freedoms. Yet, their absence exposes an inability to express trust, competence, leadership and respect. Americans can't support the Republican nominees to be potential world leaders, because they are clearly incapable of moral statesmanship.  Forgettable RNFeC quotes should be completely erased from political narratives, because the words, and expressions don't represent, or reflect the high standards of leadership or the values of most Americans.

Friends like Senator Lindsey Graham are hard to find

“I know exactly when Ted is going to drop out of the race: March 12,” Senator Graham said. 
“That’s Canadian week at Myrtle Beach.”

Senator Lindsey Graham (R) South /Carolina - may have a career as a satirist

Although Senator Lindsey Graham is a familiar Republican politician, but he's also proving to be quite a good comedian. He's especially funny or, at least, ironically inconsistent, as he seems to be raising money to help his new best friend Senator Ted Cruz, who;s running for the Republican nomination for president. 

Indeed, Graham seems resigned to a Republican presidential loss in the November election, even as he shrugged and asked morning news host Mika Brezinski if she'd like to give money to Ted Cruz?

It's like throwing  money in a dumpster, in my opinion.
The New York Post reports:
South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham said his party has gone “bat—” crazy as he mercilessly mocked the entire 2016 presidential field, even joking that one could get away with murdering Ted Cruz — if it happened in the Senate.  (No one would convict you.)

Graham, who dropped out of the presidential race in December, urged his party to “do a little soul-searching” in his joke-fest Thursday night at the Washington Press Club Foundation’s 72nd Congressional Dinner.

He went on his tear while the remaining Republican candidates clashed in a debate in Houston.

Moreover, he turned self-deprecating by noting that the dinner was a “good reason not to watch the Republican debate — yet another one I have not been in.”

He then targeted Cruz, the Texas senator who is unpopular among his colleagues.

“A good Republican would defend Ted Cruz after tonight,” he said. “That ain’t happening. … If you killed Ted Cruz on the floor of the Senate, and the trial was in the Senate, nobody would convict you.”

He also made fun of Cruz’s upbringing in Canada, where he was born — which Donald Trump has argued disqualifies him from the high office.

“I know exactly when Ted is going to drop out of the race: March 12,” Graham said. “That’s Canadian week at Myrtle Beach.”

To use a cliche, to have political friends like Senator Lindsey Graham a person doesn't need any enemies. Well, at least humor is involved, regardless of whether or not it's appreciated by the targets of Senator Graham's quick wit. (Likely not...)

It seems like Senator Graham will not be voting in the 2016 presidential election because he is adamant about not voting for Hillary Clinton.  Although Graham appears to be reluctantly raising money for Senator "Cruz to loose", who is running for the GOP nomination, he believes his candidacy will not succeed.  In fact, rather than support Cruz, instead, Graham says Governor John Kasich is the best candidate to run as a Republican.

Governor John Kasich (R) of Ohio is the preferred GOP presidential candidate for Senator Graham, but he's raising money to help Senator Ted Cruz.  "Who's on first?"

Nevertheless, he continues to ask people to give money to the Senator Ted Cruz campaign.  "Who;s on first?" 

This convoluted comedy with Senator Graham is hardly a way for Republicans to present their crumbling political base with a sense of leadership or confidence.  

Saturday Night Live, of course, has plenty of satire to choose from for their weekly hilarious comedy skits and they don't even have to pay script writers- just call up Senator Lindsey Graham, instead. Friends like Senator Lindsey Graham are, indeed, hard to find because, they are more like enemies.  

Republicans have no plan for America- they just whine

It's sad to read the daily political reports about how the Republicans are critical of everything, but unwilling to solve anything.  

Now, Republicans are complaining about President Obama being in Cuba, attending an international baseball game, when the American Tampa FL team was playing the Cubans. Instead, the Republicans, the wanna-be presidents, think President Obama should've returned to Washington DC. Yet, when Republicans complain about where President Obama was while Brussels was attacked, they have no idea about what President Obama would do if he returned to Washington DC? It's plainly stupid to criticize President Obama without offering any constructive advice. Ted Cruz whines, Rudy Guilini pontificates, but neither offers a plan for improving the Brussels crises.

In fact, President Obama was building an important relationship with our Cuban neighbors, a mere 90 miles from Key West, Florida. Besides, right wing Republicans go into seizures about the possibility of closing the Guantanamo prison where suspected terrorists are being held for years, without trials. Yet, Republicans are appalled because President Obama wants to build relationships with Cuba that will improve our potential to maintain the base located on Cuban property. 

Meanwhile, the terrible Brussels attacks were conducted by terrorists who were, apparently, hiding in plain view of their neighbors. Do Republicans think President Obama can fix the Belgian security system? It certainly makes more sense for President Obama to fix what he has the power to repair- meaning, the US-Cuban international relationship.  

Rudy Giuliani: Obama should have cut Cuba trip short because Brussels was his ‘Pearl Harbor’-OMG: Brussels was certainly not Pearl Harbor. Indeed, does Guiliani know Pearl Harbor is in Hawaii?

Somehow, the Belgians have to figure out how their security was unable to find known terrorists living right under their noses in downtown Brussels. President Obama cannot help them.

Terrorists intend for their horror to disrupt people's lives. Therefore, none of us can let them have their heinous way.  

President Obama made the perfect decision to stay in Cuba while his international team supports European efforts to destroy evil ISIS, the radical Islamic caliphate that's living in their midst, among the population, in plain site.

Guantánamo belongs to Cuba

Senator Cruz "to loose" and Senator Marco Rubio have no idea about this US-Cuba treaty; because, otherwise, they couldn't possibly make preposterous statements about how to sustain Guantánamo and the prison where Muslim terrorists are held, without due process.


"...agrees and covenants to pay to the Republic of Cuba the annual sum of two thousand dollars, in gold coin of the United States,.."
There's no way to expand Guantánamo when the US doesn't own the property!


Guantánamo

Guantanamo Cuba, aerial view

Lease to the United States by the Government of Cuba of Certain Areas of Land and Water for Naval or Coaling Stations in Guantanamo and Bahia Honda; July 2, 1903 http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/dip_cuba003.asp

Signed at Habana, July 2, 1903;
Approved by the President, October 2, 1903;
Ratified by the President of Cuba, August 17,1903;
Ratifications exchanged at Washington, October 6,1903

The United States of America and the Republic of Cuba, being desirous to conclude the conditions of the lease of areas of land and water for the establishment of naval or coaling stations in Guantanamo and Bahia Honda the Republic of Cuba made to the United States by the Agreement of February 16/23,1903, in fulfillment of the provisions of Article Seven of the Constitutional Appendix of the Republic of Cuba, have appointed their Plenipotentiaries to that end.-

The President of the United States of America, Herbert G. Squiers, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary in Havana.

And the President of the Republic of Cuba, Jose M. Garcia Montes, Secretary of Finance, and acting Secretary of State and Justice, who, after communicating to each other their respective full powers, found to be in due form, have agreed upon the following:

ARTICLE I

The United States of America agrees and covenants to pay to the Republic of Cuba the annual sum of two thousand dollars, in gold coin of the United States, as long as the former shall occupy and use said areas of land by virtue of said agreement.

All private lands and other real property within said areas shall be acquired forthwith by the Republic of Cuba.

The United States of America agrees to furnish to the Republic of Cuba the sums necessary for the purchase of said private lands and properties and such sums shall be accepted by the Republic of Cuba as advance payment on account of rental due by virtue of said Agreement.

ARTICLE II

The said areas shall be surveyed and their boundaries distinctly marked by permanent fences or inclosures.

The expenses of construction and maintenance of such fences or inclosures shall be borne by the United States.

ARTICLE III

The United States of America agrees that no person, partnership, or corporation shall be permitted to establish or maintain a commercial, industrial or other enterprise within said areas.

ARTICLE IV

Fugitives from justice charged with crimes or misdemeanors amenable to Cuban Law, taking refuge within said areas, shall be delivered up by the United States authorities on demand by duly authorized Cuban authorities.

On the other hand the Republic of Cuba agrees that fugitives from justice charged with crimes or misdemeanors amenable to United States law, committed within said areas, taking refuge in Cuban territory, shall on demand, be delivered up to duly authorized United States authorities.

ARTICLE V

Materials of all kinds, merchandise, stores and munitions of war imported into said areas for exclusive use and consumption therein, shall not be subject to payment of customs duties nor any other fees or charges and the vessels which may carry same shall not be subject to payment of port, tonnage, anchorage or other fees, except in case said vessels shall be discharged without the limits of said areas; and said vessels shall not be discharged without the limits of said areas otherwise than through a regular port of entry of the Republic of Cuba when both cargo and vessel shall be subject to all Cuban Customs laws and regulations and payment of corresponding duties and fees.

It is further agreed that such materials, merchandise, stores and munitions of war shall not be transported from said areas into Cuban territory.

ARTICLE VI

Except as provided in the preceding Article, vessels entering into or departing from the Bays of Guantanamo and Bahia Honda within the limits of Cuban territory shall be subject exclusively to Cuban laws and authorities and orders emanating from the latter in all that respects port police, Customs or Health, and authorities of the United States shall place no obstacle in the way of entrance and departure of said vessels except in case of a state of war.

ARTICLE VII

This lease shall be ratified and the ratifications shall be exchanged in the City of Washington within seven months from this date.

In witness whereof, We, the respective Plenipotentiaries, have signed this lease and hereunto affixed our Seals.

Done at Havana, in duplicate in English and Spanish this second day of July nineteen hundred and three.

JOSE M. GARCIA MONTES [SEAL]

H. G. SQUIERS [SEAL]

I, Theodore Roosevelt, President of the United States of America, having seen and considered the foregoing lease, do hereby approve the same, by virtue of the authority conferred by the seventh of the provisions defining the relations which are to exist between the United States and Cuba, contained in the Act of Congress approved March 2, 1901, entitled "An Act making appropriation for the support of the Army for the fiscal year ending June 30,1902."

Washington, October 2, 1903.

THEODORE ROOSEVELT. 

In other words (although I'm certainly no expert about treaties and leases) it appears that the future of Guantánamo is really under Cuban jurisprudence.

Karl Rove negative ads should "Mind Your Own Damn Business" (MYODB)

Surely, we don't need a degree in political rocket science to figure out who Karl Rove want to see running as a Democrat, in 2016.
Republican political operative Karl Rove is creating a negative TV ad campaign against Hillary Clinton. Why? Because he wants to see Senator Sanders as the Democratic candidate! It's obvious the "phantom of Republican politics", Mr. Rove, just can't mind his own business. While Repulican candidates are taking out negative ads, while opposing one another, Mr. Rove is creating ads to stir angst among much better qualified Democrats.  

Karl Rove leads the propaganda machine called "American Crossroads"

Karl Rove is using his propaganda machine to influence Demoratic primary voters- he needs to "MYODB"
It's like Rove knows the threshhold of support for "none of the above" in the Republican line up must, at least, rise above what Democrats can accumulate in support from voters. 

Rove is a strategist who finds devious ways to leverage the negative, in favor of Republican candidates. In the line up of wanna-bees for 2016, there's nobody among the Republicans who is exempt from being reduced to negative rubble, by each other. Therefore, strategist Rove made the decision to do to Democrats what the Republicans are doing, to denegrate each other.

Of course, it's not fair to single out Secretary Hillary Clinton in the "Mind Your Own Damn Business" Karl Rove negative ad campaign. What Rove really wants to do is to expoentially build enough negative campaign momentum within the Democratic candidates, so that they'll do to one another what Repbulicans are successfully doing to turn on themselves. Rove's strategy is revealed as being deceitful by Hillary Clinton.  Also, the intention of the Rove ads is, ultimately, to benefit Senator Sanders so the Republicans can begin their "Willie Horton" style campaign against him.  Nevertheless, qualified Democratic candidates- Senator Sanders, Secretary Clinton and Governor O'Malley, must resist the pressure to create negative ads against each other. If Democrats start throwing political stones at each other, they'll be doing exactly what Karl Rove is hoping to achieve with his "Mind Your Own Damn Business", negative campaign ads. 

Even worse, if Democrats fall victime to the Rove propaganda machine, they'll be allowing political operatives with American Crossroads (aka "Rove Propaganda) to influence the selection of a Democratic presidential candidate.

Hillary: Karl Rove Behind Attacks  NewsMax reports

Republican operative Karl Rove is behind an attack ad aimed at turning Iowa caucus-goers against her, Democrat Hillary Clinton said Sunday on "Meet the Press." (with Chuck Todd) 

Clinton was asked by moderator Chuck Todd whether big banks paying her more than $200,000 per speech hurt her credibility.

Clinton responded that she gave speeches to a "wide array of groups," after ending her stint at President Barack Obama's secretary of state.

"People were interested in what I saw, what I thought," she said. "Americans doing business in every aspect of the economy want to know more about the world."

"You don’t think they expect anything in return?" Todd asked.

"Absolutely not," Clinton insisted, pointing out that she took on Wall Street during her time as the Senator from New York.

"And it's really interesting to me that now Karl Rove is taking money from the financial interests who run an ad against me to try and influence Democrats not to support me," she said. "Why? Ask yourself why? Because he knows, one, I know what needs to be done, and two, I know how to get it done to make sure Wall Street writ large, not just the big banks but the investment banks, hedge funds, and everybody else, can no longer wreck our economy the way they did in 2008."

The ad to which Clinton referred was made by Rove's super PAC, American Crossroads (aka "Rove Propoganda"). In the add, it accuses Clinton of being able to pay for her massive TV ad buys with money from Wall Street interests. (OMG! This is the ultimate Republican hypocrisy! Operatives like Rove obviously have no ethics, whatsoever.  Senator Cruz took plenty from Goldman Sachs, to name just one....)

A graphic in the ad shows Clinton receiving $6.4 million from Wall Street speaking fees and only $118,000 from Iowans contributing to her campaign.

"Hillary rewarded Wall Street with the $700 billion bailout," the ad's announcer says. "Does Iowa really want Wall Street in the White House?"

Clearly, Karl Rove and his unethical operative band of American Crossroads pirriahas want their "last person standing" our of the GOP line up to be running against Senator Bernie Sanders.  Of course, if it's Senator "Cruz to loose" who eventually winds up standing on the GOP nomination platform this summer, then the Karl Rove "MYODB" can easily be turned around.  "What goes around comes around," "eh"? (As they say in Canada)

To be continued: "The Underhanded 'Rove-Cruz' connection".