I was reading through what I wrote in March about what I was going through, and I thought I would write an update.
And that update is going well. I wrote out some goals for myself in March. I am going to the YMCA twice a week, but tomorrow will begin three times a week. I love the class, the other women in it, and especially the instructor. It is more difficult than I thought it would be. While it is low impact, the water causes more resistance. After a good workout, I hop into a swimming lane and leisurely swim laps for a couple of hours...usually the backstroke. Afterward, I take a shower (can't stand the chlorine on me and I use a shampoo that takes the chlorine out of my hair.) and I go home. The thing that surprises me the most about going is that I love going. It has become a happy and safe place for me. And it is where I go to relieve stress. The reason I decided to increase it to Friday mornings (though there is no class, I can still use the YMCA's aquatic exercise equipment) was because I would become more irritated from Thursday to Sunday because I wasn't going. Now my more pressing issue is to find nose clips that won't slip off of my nose. I have a feeling that part of the problem is my smallish nose.
I am getting up relatively early these days. My psychiatrist put me on Adderall to help with the staying up thing. However, I am still getting exhausted in the morning, so I have allowed myself to sleep for a couple of hours before 1:00 pm when I have to take my second dose of Adderall. I still go to bed at really late hours, unless I swam that day. Then I am dog-tired. And I find when I go to sleep, I fall asleep right away.
I've been doing more writing, especially on my blog. And I have some stuff to work on. I have found that I love to rhyme. Not like in poetry, but in the extreme. The goal is to have as little words that don't rhyme that I can have. I have taken some words, and used a rhyming site online and gotten words that rhyme with it. I plan on writing out a piece, using as many of those words as I can.
I'm still coloring. But not as obsessively as before. It still is a very calming factor where I am able to use my skills when I'm not in a crisis. Now if only I didn't need to buy every gel pen, Sharpie, marker, or colored pencil out there. Actually, I don't want to buy everything...I want the best. Where the markers are over $400 and the colored pencils over $250...but that ain't going to happen. I will just have to make do with what I have.
My therapy appointments are now once a month. More of a maintenance role.
That doesn't mean that I haven't had bumps because I've had. A long lost cousin of my Mom's became friends on Facebook. She is a huge Trump supporter, so after clashing, we all decided to not comment on political posts...something which she didn't honor. And then she made a post comparing a certain group as to being mentally ill. I don't care who she compared that group too...except for the mentally ill. So I set about to educate her. She got rude and unfriend both Mom and I. All because I was trying to point out to her how that kind of stigma affects us.
Of course, the Orlando shootings were very upsetting, more so because I have friends that were directly connected to the shooting. And it bothers me that I have no way to wave a magic wand and make their pain go away. Before the Orlando shooting, another friend lost her brother to a spree killer. Though I haven't seen him in over 20 years, I too knew him, and it hit me really hard.
And finally, I misplaced my iPod...over a week ago, and it is very upsetting. My whole music catalog is on it and every logical place we have looked has turned up nothing. Every illogical place we've looked hasn't turned up anything either. But honestly, I didn't expect to find it in the freezer. And being separated from my music has also made me irate.
That is about all. I'm happy to be here, and happy to have my family and my friends.
Thursday, June 23, 2016
Tuesday, June 21, 2016
Guns, Gun Violence, and the Second Amendment
"A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
That is what our Second Amendment says. It was written at a time when the country didn't have a regular army and it was up to local people to protect their localities from violence. Under British rule, they weren't allowed to have guns. And I'm big on the constitution, so I recognize the right to own guns.
However, the Constitution was also written in such a way that allows for fluidity. The Founding Fathers were well aware that if this country were to continue successfully, the Constitution needed to change with the times. This has allowed for setting the voting age at 18, women's voting, emancipation, granting voting rights and equality for African Americans, to name a few.
That does not mean I have to like guns. In fact, I hate them with a passion. I am afraid of them. I have not seen one, except on a police officer's belt, and that is just fine with me.
Before the Orlando shooting, I was planning on writing this blog. A week before Orlando I found out that my friend's brother was killed in a spree shooting in a hotel lobby. I lived with my friend for a month and I remember how much fun we had riding in the back of his pickup truck with the wind whipping all around us. He was not the target, just a person who was in the wrong place at the wrong time. This is the first time that a gun death has hit that close to home. And my heart broke for my friend. We live so far apart right now that I felt helpless to help her, except to send her my love and support. Somehow that doesn't seem enough.
Then Orlando happened. When I first turned on the television, I heard that another shooting happened, and my thoughts went right to praying for the victims and their families while shaking my head. Then I heard the word "Orlando." It ended up that in a space of a week I either knew someone directly involved with a gun death or were a part of a close-knit group who were directly connected.
When a mass shooting happens, one of the things I hate is that the media will start reporting before investigators even have a chance to process the scene. And people fly off the handle. Automatically there is a cry for gun laws to be passed, and the cries of those gun laws being tantamount to banning of all guns and the gun rights people feeding the fear that if you aren't armed, you are more likely to become a victim of violence. Our society is obsessed with keeping guns and having the right to carry conceal.
Donald Trump said after the shootings that if there had been people armed the death toll would've been lower. No, it would've been greater. Even the NRA came out and disagreed with him. While many crimes are thwarted by armed civilians, a nightclub is not one of them. There were a bunch of people drinking and having fun. Alcohol, guns, and a dark nightclub do not mix, and there would've been several more fatalities if the patrons took the law into their own hands. Then there are the ones that carry that have a hair trigger temper and any provocation could end up in a shooting. It is so easy to overreact when you are angry.
Is it right to mete out vigilante justice? No, it isn't. On the other end of the spectrum, there are conceal carry permit holders that have not gone through any training and don't know the first thing on how to help in a stressful situation. In those cases, the shooter is just as likely to shoot an unarmed civilian as the shooter. or they might freeze up and do nothing.
The excuses that pro-gun people have are amazing. Some examples are: The Nazis banned guns. Actually quite the opposite. In 1938 they eased up gun laws that were set up from before the Nazis were in power. They also changed the law that said that Jews weren't allowed to keep them.
The Honduras and Switerzalnd issue. No, Honduras doesn't ban guns. Its citizens are actually allowed to own up to 5 firearms. And yes, there is a high crime rate there. They are also a country rife with drug violence. And no, Switzerland doesn't require you to own a gun. Men under the age of 34 are required to do military service, and during that time they are issued a gun and trained in its use. At the end of their service, they have the right to keep the gun if they like. If they do keep the gun, the army sends it to a weapons factory where the automatic function is removed, which turns it into a semi-automatic or self-loading rifle. People must have a permit to carry a gun in public, and they are usually only granted to people in the security industry, not for self-defense.
And then there is this...which drives me up the wall...Chicago has such strict gun laws and yet it has the highest murder rate. So here's the deal. I grew up 30 miles outside of Chicago. And though they have tough gun laws within the city, the outlying suburbs (especially in Indiana) don't have them. Indiana's gun laws are pretty lax, and yes, northwestern Indiana is considered suburban Chicago. In fact, 60% of guns confiscated during the commission of a crime came from Indiana. The only way that Chicago can enforce their laws is if gun regulations become federal instead of local.
Another disturbing trend is irresponsible gun owners who leave loaded weapons within the reach of young children. In 2015, 265 children under 18 picked up a gun and fired. These were mostly toddlers and teens. Out of that number, 83 were fatal. These are so preventable, and requires nothing but common sense. If you have a loaded gun in the house, it needs to be safely kept in a lock box.
I read a story recently, that a man went to defend a man who was being carjacked. Instead of shooting the criminals, he shot the victim in the head. His reaction? He took off. Guns don't always come to the rescue, they make it worse. If you're going to carry a concealed weapon in order to protect yourself or your fellow man and screw up and shoot the victim, at least have the courtesy to stay around and take responsibility. If you are going to carry something that's only purpose is to kill or injure another human being, you must also be willing to take accountability for your actions. And the statistics don't sound good either. Only 3% of situations with a "good guy with a gun" scenario are successful.
Guns don't kill people, people keep people, or a car can be used as a deadly weapon. The first statement is correct. People do kill people. However a gun makes it deadlier, and it is a split second decision that a person might not have made under any other circumstance. As for cars...well, for one, they are not expressly used to kill or maim. They are for getting from point A to point B. In order to operate a car, you have to take a class, practice with a learner's permit with an adult, take a practical and written test. Once you pass and you got your license, you get a car. The car needs to be registered with the state and needs a license plate, that needs to renewed yearly. You also have to buy insurance. And some places are getting more strict about renewing driver's licenses. Some states require a thumbprint. Two years ago my Mom had to renew her license here in Florida. She had to purchase a copy of her marriage license (and my parents were divorced wen I was 4) to prove how she got from her maiden name to her current name. This was to renew, not to get a new license. It takes less to get a gun, believe it or not. Obviously, there needs to be stricter regulations.
There is one comparison between cars and guns that I liked. We have aggressively gone after drunk driving, and drunk driving accidents went down, without another Prohibition. If we were to do the same with guns, gun violence might go down. And you could always look towards Australia. Their Government had decided enough was enough after their first mass shooting.
I recently read an article that was titled "7 Things That Are Harder to Get Than an Assualt Weapon. This deals specifically with Florida and was published following the Orlando shooting. As I live in Florida too, I thought these were very interesting.
1. An abortion. Women must get an ultrasound and counseling before waiting 24 hours to get the procedure done.
2. A Driver's License. Here's what the Rolling Stone article said: "According to Florida law, you do not need a permit to purchase or carry an assault rifle, nor a license to own one. But Florida, like all U.S. states, does require anyone who operates a motor vehicle to have a driver's license. To get one, you'll have to provide a birth certificate or passport, proof of a Social Security number and two proofs of address. You have to take a four-hour Traffic Law and Substance Abuse Education class, pass a written test and a driving test and log 50 hours behind the wheel (at least 10 of which must be at night)."
3. Solar Panels. Yup, that's right. The state charges prohibitive leasing fees for someone to install solar panels. Why? Well, obviously the energy industry has the state in their back pockets.
4. Voter registration. Yup, we're one of the states that passed harder voter registration. Might I add that it is much our right to vote as it is to carry a gun?
5. A Class I Exotic Animal. You really have to jump through hoops to own a Class I or Class II exotic animal. I have a Class III permit just in case I use my snakes and lizard to educate people in a place. It cost me $50.00 a year. And I also have to prove that I have the correct enclosure allowances, how to take care of the particular animal, a hurricane plan, a vet, and the address and phone number of someone that does not live with me. But permit fees for the animals above can run into the hundreds.
6. A marriage license. Apparently you are required to take a 4-hour premarital course or marital course. If you don't want to, that's fine, but you have to wait three days before getting married.
7. Here's the real doozy. A handgun. Yes, that's right. You can actually walk into a gun store and buy a Sig Sauer MCX, but you need to wait three days to get a handgun.
Another one I hate with a passion. Regulations aren't going to stop criminals. Well, duh!! So we shouldn't have laws against murder because nothing is ever going to stop people from murdering? If that was a reality-based justification, then there wouldn't be a need for any laws or a Congress or a Constitution. Every law is broken. If you are speeding, you are breaking the law. Does that mean that there shouldn't be any regulations such as stop signs, lights, driving in the correct lane, etc? I declare this excuse complete bullshit.
And finally, I must end with a couple extremely disturbing statistics. As everyone should know who knows me, I am bipolar so I pay attention to these facts. People diagnosed wth bipolar are 15% more likely to commit suicide. No, I don't know how many of those are gun suicides, but I bet it's quite a few. The suicide rate by gun is roughly twice as high as that of the homicide rate by gun. People who shoot themselves succeed between 72% - 92% of the time and 80% of those suicides were done on impulse. All other methods of suicide have a 40%-50% chance of succeeding. And finally, if there is a gun associated with a domestic violence situation there is an increase of 500%.
So what to do? Before I start on my opinion, I would like to reiterate that yes, I know that this isn't going to stop gun violence. But I firmly believe that it will save lives, and if even ONE LIFE is saved, then it will be worth it. If there is one family that doesn't have to mourn, it is worth it. And if you are a law-abiding citizen, you shouldn't really care if there is more comprehensive gun control, because it SAVES LIVES. No one, and I mean NO ONE has threatened to overturn the Second Amendment or take away your guns. Stop being paranoid and start caring about the humans you share the earth with.
First off, we need to start with banning all assault rifles, high-capacity magazines, and any ammunition that is specifically used for those weapons. You don't need to shoot 300 times a minute if there is someone in your house unless you need an excuse to redecorate your house. And unless deer are using rifles now to defend themselves, you don't need it to go hunting. Unless you want a little lead with your venison. Yes, compared to all other guns, as a whole, deaths by assault rifles are relatively low. However, they are one of the most popular guns to buy. Assault weapons should be stored and kept at gun ranges where people can go and learn to shoot it properly in a safe area.
Close the loopholes! Instead of individual dealers at gun shows run background checks, have the show do it. If someone passes, put some sort of identifying thing on them. Like if you go to an all ages concert. If you want to drink there's usually some bright colored bracelet that you can't get off for weeks and has been known to break scissors. The Internet is tricky, and I have no ideas how to handle it. You can get anything on there, including children and slaves.
Before issuing a permit, there needs to be background checks. How far should they go back? As far as necessary. Not only should they look at criminal records, but the length of their rap sheets, any signs of violence, like dropped domestic violence charges, and things like repeated DUIs and/or a history of being involved in an organization that has violent tendencies. They should have references on the application. An applicant should also submit to a psychological exam (our soldiers and police/fire departments have them done before hiring someone.) And there should be a release of information for any psychiatric treatment or medical condition that would preclude a permit, much less a license.
Do not give permits or licenses to violent ex-convicts, violent felons, rapists, those with domestic abuse histories (including those where 911 was called, or there was a hospital involved. As well any incidents that weren't brought to a charge,) the Terrorist List, the No Fly list, domestic terrorist groups, and the mentally ill or mentally incapacitated.
Guns must be registered, along with its unique tool markings. The permit holder must also register a 10-print card and palm prints. And the license needs to be renewed every year for a fee, with occasional practical or written tests (like Driver's licenses.)
To qualify for a gun license, a person must obtain a learner's permit and take classes for no less than 6 weeks (both classroom and in the field) to insure proper education, safety skills, and learning how to shoot. This would also help a person to not overreact in a dangerous situation. While on the permit, a person would not be eligible to shoot unless with they're with their instructors, or with a licensed gun owner who has a special qualification to supervise people with permits. Refresher classes should be offered at regular intervals.
After the meeting of all these requirements, they will again take another practical and written test. They have 3 chances to pass before they have to go back and repeat the process.
When a law enforcement officer is called to a scene of violent occurrences, background checks for registered guns should be run on all people around, and the guns confiscated until either the charges are cleared or they pass a competency hearing (especially so in the case of women who withdraw charges against their violent partners, or testimony of family members of a mentally ill person.) However, it should be understood that their actions might have consequences on their license, especially if a firearm was used in the course of the incident.
Courts can suspend licenses and confiscate weapons as needed. Law enforcement officers are also allowed to confiscate weapons if they think that there is the possibility that violence will occur.
I know if I were to post this on Facebook I would be skewered. However, a lot of this is practicality, common sense, and based on current drivers license and law enforcement protocols
People are all up in arms about their right to bear arms, but every person is also entitled to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Which doesn't really work if instead of pursuing happiness we live in fear of being shot. Which doesn't give us much liberty or life. We have a right to live our lives. And I think our right transcends the right to bear arms.
After all, when our Founding Fathers wrote the Second Amendment, they had single shot muskets where they had to load the shot and powder by hand before shooting it again. Nothing like an AR-15 or a Sig Sauer MCX.
Update: 6/28/16: After reading a link about 5 common sense things for gun control, I have rethought my position. The No Fly/Terrorist lists may not be accurate and would affect innocent people. So if a background checks get a flag, they would have 3 days to decide if the person is capable of owning a gun. People with mental illness can also request that they be added to the list in order to protect themselves.
And one more car thing that I forgot to mention. Require gun owners to carry insurance to cover basic things like home invasion, protection, hunting, and target practice/sport shooting. It might make a person think about shooting if it's going to cost them.
Here is the article I read... 5 Common Sense Ways for Gun Control
That is what our Second Amendment says. It was written at a time when the country didn't have a regular army and it was up to local people to protect their localities from violence. Under British rule, they weren't allowed to have guns. And I'm big on the constitution, so I recognize the right to own guns.
However, the Constitution was also written in such a way that allows for fluidity. The Founding Fathers were well aware that if this country were to continue successfully, the Constitution needed to change with the times. This has allowed for setting the voting age at 18, women's voting, emancipation, granting voting rights and equality for African Americans, to name a few.
That does not mean I have to like guns. In fact, I hate them with a passion. I am afraid of them. I have not seen one, except on a police officer's belt, and that is just fine with me.
Before the Orlando shooting, I was planning on writing this blog. A week before Orlando I found out that my friend's brother was killed in a spree shooting in a hotel lobby. I lived with my friend for a month and I remember how much fun we had riding in the back of his pickup truck with the wind whipping all around us. He was not the target, just a person who was in the wrong place at the wrong time. This is the first time that a gun death has hit that close to home. And my heart broke for my friend. We live so far apart right now that I felt helpless to help her, except to send her my love and support. Somehow that doesn't seem enough.
Then Orlando happened. When I first turned on the television, I heard that another shooting happened, and my thoughts went right to praying for the victims and their families while shaking my head. Then I heard the word "Orlando." It ended up that in a space of a week I either knew someone directly involved with a gun death or were a part of a close-knit group who were directly connected.
When a mass shooting happens, one of the things I hate is that the media will start reporting before investigators even have a chance to process the scene. And people fly off the handle. Automatically there is a cry for gun laws to be passed, and the cries of those gun laws being tantamount to banning of all guns and the gun rights people feeding the fear that if you aren't armed, you are more likely to become a victim of violence. Our society is obsessed with keeping guns and having the right to carry conceal.
Donald Trump said after the shootings that if there had been people armed the death toll would've been lower. No, it would've been greater. Even the NRA came out and disagreed with him. While many crimes are thwarted by armed civilians, a nightclub is not one of them. There were a bunch of people drinking and having fun. Alcohol, guns, and a dark nightclub do not mix, and there would've been several more fatalities if the patrons took the law into their own hands. Then there are the ones that carry that have a hair trigger temper and any provocation could end up in a shooting. It is so easy to overreact when you are angry.
Is it right to mete out vigilante justice? No, it isn't. On the other end of the spectrum, there are conceal carry permit holders that have not gone through any training and don't know the first thing on how to help in a stressful situation. In those cases, the shooter is just as likely to shoot an unarmed civilian as the shooter. or they might freeze up and do nothing.
The excuses that pro-gun people have are amazing. Some examples are: The Nazis banned guns. Actually quite the opposite. In 1938 they eased up gun laws that were set up from before the Nazis were in power. They also changed the law that said that Jews weren't allowed to keep them.
The Honduras and Switerzalnd issue. No, Honduras doesn't ban guns. Its citizens are actually allowed to own up to 5 firearms. And yes, there is a high crime rate there. They are also a country rife with drug violence. And no, Switzerland doesn't require you to own a gun. Men under the age of 34 are required to do military service, and during that time they are issued a gun and trained in its use. At the end of their service, they have the right to keep the gun if they like. If they do keep the gun, the army sends it to a weapons factory where the automatic function is removed, which turns it into a semi-automatic or self-loading rifle. People must have a permit to carry a gun in public, and they are usually only granted to people in the security industry, not for self-defense.
And then there is this...which drives me up the wall...Chicago has such strict gun laws and yet it has the highest murder rate. So here's the deal. I grew up 30 miles outside of Chicago. And though they have tough gun laws within the city, the outlying suburbs (especially in Indiana) don't have them. Indiana's gun laws are pretty lax, and yes, northwestern Indiana is considered suburban Chicago. In fact, 60% of guns confiscated during the commission of a crime came from Indiana. The only way that Chicago can enforce their laws is if gun regulations become federal instead of local.
Another disturbing trend is irresponsible gun owners who leave loaded weapons within the reach of young children. In 2015, 265 children under 18 picked up a gun and fired. These were mostly toddlers and teens. Out of that number, 83 were fatal. These are so preventable, and requires nothing but common sense. If you have a loaded gun in the house, it needs to be safely kept in a lock box.
I read a story recently, that a man went to defend a man who was being carjacked. Instead of shooting the criminals, he shot the victim in the head. His reaction? He took off. Guns don't always come to the rescue, they make it worse. If you're going to carry a concealed weapon in order to protect yourself or your fellow man and screw up and shoot the victim, at least have the courtesy to stay around and take responsibility. If you are going to carry something that's only purpose is to kill or injure another human being, you must also be willing to take accountability for your actions. And the statistics don't sound good either. Only 3% of situations with a "good guy with a gun" scenario are successful.
Guns don't kill people, people keep people, or a car can be used as a deadly weapon. The first statement is correct. People do kill people. However a gun makes it deadlier, and it is a split second decision that a person might not have made under any other circumstance. As for cars...well, for one, they are not expressly used to kill or maim. They are for getting from point A to point B. In order to operate a car, you have to take a class, practice with a learner's permit with an adult, take a practical and written test. Once you pass and you got your license, you get a car. The car needs to be registered with the state and needs a license plate, that needs to renewed yearly. You also have to buy insurance. And some places are getting more strict about renewing driver's licenses. Some states require a thumbprint. Two years ago my Mom had to renew her license here in Florida. She had to purchase a copy of her marriage license (and my parents were divorced wen I was 4) to prove how she got from her maiden name to her current name. This was to renew, not to get a new license. It takes less to get a gun, believe it or not. Obviously, there needs to be stricter regulations.
There is one comparison between cars and guns that I liked. We have aggressively gone after drunk driving, and drunk driving accidents went down, without another Prohibition. If we were to do the same with guns, gun violence might go down. And you could always look towards Australia. Their Government had decided enough was enough after their first mass shooting.
I recently read an article that was titled "7 Things That Are Harder to Get Than an Assualt Weapon. This deals specifically with Florida and was published following the Orlando shooting. As I live in Florida too, I thought these were very interesting.
1. An abortion. Women must get an ultrasound and counseling before waiting 24 hours to get the procedure done.
2. A Driver's License. Here's what the Rolling Stone article said: "According to Florida law, you do not need a permit to purchase or carry an assault rifle, nor a license to own one. But Florida, like all U.S. states, does require anyone who operates a motor vehicle to have a driver's license. To get one, you'll have to provide a birth certificate or passport, proof of a Social Security number and two proofs of address. You have to take a four-hour Traffic Law and Substance Abuse Education class, pass a written test and a driving test and log 50 hours behind the wheel (at least 10 of which must be at night)."
3. Solar Panels. Yup, that's right. The state charges prohibitive leasing fees for someone to install solar panels. Why? Well, obviously the energy industry has the state in their back pockets.
4. Voter registration. Yup, we're one of the states that passed harder voter registration. Might I add that it is much our right to vote as it is to carry a gun?
5. A Class I Exotic Animal. You really have to jump through hoops to own a Class I or Class II exotic animal. I have a Class III permit just in case I use my snakes and lizard to educate people in a place. It cost me $50.00 a year. And I also have to prove that I have the correct enclosure allowances, how to take care of the particular animal, a hurricane plan, a vet, and the address and phone number of someone that does not live with me. But permit fees for the animals above can run into the hundreds.
6. A marriage license. Apparently you are required to take a 4-hour premarital course or marital course. If you don't want to, that's fine, but you have to wait three days before getting married.
7. Here's the real doozy. A handgun. Yes, that's right. You can actually walk into a gun store and buy a Sig Sauer MCX, but you need to wait three days to get a handgun.
Another one I hate with a passion. Regulations aren't going to stop criminals. Well, duh!! So we shouldn't have laws against murder because nothing is ever going to stop people from murdering? If that was a reality-based justification, then there wouldn't be a need for any laws or a Congress or a Constitution. Every law is broken. If you are speeding, you are breaking the law. Does that mean that there shouldn't be any regulations such as stop signs, lights, driving in the correct lane, etc? I declare this excuse complete bullshit.
And finally, I must end with a couple extremely disturbing statistics. As everyone should know who knows me, I am bipolar so I pay attention to these facts. People diagnosed wth bipolar are 15% more likely to commit suicide. No, I don't know how many of those are gun suicides, but I bet it's quite a few. The suicide rate by gun is roughly twice as high as that of the homicide rate by gun. People who shoot themselves succeed between 72% - 92% of the time and 80% of those suicides were done on impulse. All other methods of suicide have a 40%-50% chance of succeeding. And finally, if there is a gun associated with a domestic violence situation there is an increase of 500%.
So what to do? Before I start on my opinion, I would like to reiterate that yes, I know that this isn't going to stop gun violence. But I firmly believe that it will save lives, and if even ONE LIFE is saved, then it will be worth it. If there is one family that doesn't have to mourn, it is worth it. And if you are a law-abiding citizen, you shouldn't really care if there is more comprehensive gun control, because it SAVES LIVES. No one, and I mean NO ONE has threatened to overturn the Second Amendment or take away your guns. Stop being paranoid and start caring about the humans you share the earth with.
First off, we need to start with banning all assault rifles, high-capacity magazines, and any ammunition that is specifically used for those weapons. You don't need to shoot 300 times a minute if there is someone in your house unless you need an excuse to redecorate your house. And unless deer are using rifles now to defend themselves, you don't need it to go hunting. Unless you want a little lead with your venison. Yes, compared to all other guns, as a whole, deaths by assault rifles are relatively low. However, they are one of the most popular guns to buy. Assault weapons should be stored and kept at gun ranges where people can go and learn to shoot it properly in a safe area.
Close the loopholes! Instead of individual dealers at gun shows run background checks, have the show do it. If someone passes, put some sort of identifying thing on them. Like if you go to an all ages concert. If you want to drink there's usually some bright colored bracelet that you can't get off for weeks and has been known to break scissors. The Internet is tricky, and I have no ideas how to handle it. You can get anything on there, including children and slaves.
Before issuing a permit, there needs to be background checks. How far should they go back? As far as necessary. Not only should they look at criminal records, but the length of their rap sheets, any signs of violence, like dropped domestic violence charges, and things like repeated DUIs and/or a history of being involved in an organization that has violent tendencies. They should have references on the application. An applicant should also submit to a psychological exam (our soldiers and police/fire departments have them done before hiring someone.) And there should be a release of information for any psychiatric treatment or medical condition that would preclude a permit, much less a license.
Do not give permits or licenses to violent ex-convicts, violent felons, rapists, those with domestic abuse histories (including those where 911 was called, or there was a hospital involved. As well any incidents that weren't brought to a charge,) the Terrorist List, the No Fly list, domestic terrorist groups, and the mentally ill or mentally incapacitated.
Guns must be registered, along with its unique tool markings. The permit holder must also register a 10-print card and palm prints. And the license needs to be renewed every year for a fee, with occasional practical or written tests (like Driver's licenses.)
To qualify for a gun license, a person must obtain a learner's permit and take classes for no less than 6 weeks (both classroom and in the field) to insure proper education, safety skills, and learning how to shoot. This would also help a person to not overreact in a dangerous situation. While on the permit, a person would not be eligible to shoot unless with they're with their instructors, or with a licensed gun owner who has a special qualification to supervise people with permits. Refresher classes should be offered at regular intervals.
After the meeting of all these requirements, they will again take another practical and written test. They have 3 chances to pass before they have to go back and repeat the process.
When a law enforcement officer is called to a scene of violent occurrences, background checks for registered guns should be run on all people around, and the guns confiscated until either the charges are cleared or they pass a competency hearing (especially so in the case of women who withdraw charges against their violent partners, or testimony of family members of a mentally ill person.) However, it should be understood that their actions might have consequences on their license, especially if a firearm was used in the course of the incident.
Courts can suspend licenses and confiscate weapons as needed. Law enforcement officers are also allowed to confiscate weapons if they think that there is the possibility that violence will occur.
I know if I were to post this on Facebook I would be skewered. However, a lot of this is practicality, common sense, and based on current drivers license and law enforcement protocols
People are all up in arms about their right to bear arms, but every person is also entitled to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Which doesn't really work if instead of pursuing happiness we live in fear of being shot. Which doesn't give us much liberty or life. We have a right to live our lives. And I think our right transcends the right to bear arms.
After all, when our Founding Fathers wrote the Second Amendment, they had single shot muskets where they had to load the shot and powder by hand before shooting it again. Nothing like an AR-15 or a Sig Sauer MCX.
Update: 6/28/16: After reading a link about 5 common sense things for gun control, I have rethought my position. The No Fly/Terrorist lists may not be accurate and would affect innocent people. So if a background checks get a flag, they would have 3 days to decide if the person is capable of owning a gun. People with mental illness can also request that they be added to the list in order to protect themselves.
And one more car thing that I forgot to mention. Require gun owners to carry insurance to cover basic things like home invasion, protection, hunting, and target practice/sport shooting. It might make a person think about shooting if it's going to cost them.
Here is the article I read... 5 Common Sense Ways for Gun Control
Friday, June 10, 2016
Trump, Because He Scare the Hell Out of Me
At one point last month, I was actually researching Trump so I could write some entertaining novella. Then I decided that it wasn't worth the time or effort..or my blood pressure. But my urge to write about him has not abated...and if you are unacquainted with my ability to swear, consider this fair warning. Should I also add the disclaimer? These are my opinions, but they are opinions based on fact - usually a video where it comes directly from his mouth.
NOTE ON THE CITATIONS...I CHECKED MANY, MANY PAGES ON EACH SUBJECT I WROTE. IF THERE ARE CITATIONS TO GO ALONE WITH IT, THEN IT IS BECAUSE IT EXPRESSED MY OPINION.
Donald Trump scares the hell out of me. I look at him and hear what he says and think that he is the most underqualified candidate probably in the history of the country. Let me correct something. He is not underqualified, he is unqualified. Just when I start to think that he can't get any worse, he tops himself.
Here are a "few" things that bother me.
His blatant racism, Islamophobia, xenophobia (intense or irrational dislike or fear of people from other countries,) misogyny, hypocrisy, pathological lying, and infantile behavior is enough to make me sick, and wonder how hard it is to become a citizen of the Bahamas and how long does it take to get a passport.
I think the only people who he doesn't criticize are male whites.
And here we go...the tip of a mere iceberg that is Donald Trump, the man, the candidate, and his jaw-dropping words... and the reason why he is dangerous for this country.
I'm going to start on the racial stuff that he has said outright.
Mexicans: come over illegally to commit rape, murder and to sell drugs. Here's an article that explains this fully. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/07/02/surprise-donald-trump-is-wrong-about-immigrants-and-crime/ Then there is the case of Judge Gonzalo Curiel. He is hearing two cases that were brought against Trump and Trump University. Trump thinks he should've been granted a summary judgment (only around 10% get a summary judgment.) So the Federal Judge, who was born and raised in Indiana, is biased against Trump because of his "Mexican Heritage." A whole boatload of Republicans who endorsed him days before this debacle has come out attacking Trump for doing this. But he doesn't listen or care.
Mexicans: come over illegally to commit rape, murder and to sell drugs. Here's an article that explains this fully. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/07/02/surprise-donald-trump-is-wrong-about-immigrants-and-crime/ Then there is the case of Judge Gonzalo Curiel. He is hearing two cases that were brought against Trump and Trump University. Trump thinks he should've been granted a summary judgment (only around 10% get a summary judgment.) So the Federal Judge, who was born and raised in Indiana, is biased against Trump because of his "Mexican Heritage." A whole boatload of Republicans who endorsed him days before this debacle has come out attacking Trump for doing this. But he doesn't listen or care.
Muslims: He has talked about registering all Muslims living in the US. And ban all 1.2 billion Muslims from entering our country. ISIS loves this...the more Trump spews out, the more disenfranchised young Islamic men it creates that could join ISIS in attempts to get away from our anti-Muslim feelings. Congratulations Donny, you just became a recruitment tool! And then there is the false claim that thousands of Muslims were celebrating on a roof in Jersey City as the Twin Towers came down. There were reports of this happening in the days after the attacks. Major news sources tried to find evidence...and they couldn't. Trump claimed to have seen it on TV and that he had proof. As of yet, he has not produced any evidence, and indeed, the press went over everything investigated in 2001, and again, found nothing.
African Americans: He has called African Americans lazy. He has not denounced all the white supremacist groups for their hate speech. And his company has been sued at least twice for racial discrimination in that he purposely kept African Americans from being able to rent in one of his buildings. In the last few days at one of his rallies, he saw an African American man and he referred to this guy as "His African American." This man was not offended, though he doesn't support Trump either. To me, I thought it was denoting that the man belonged to Trump, as in a slave. In another speech not too long ago, he referred to them as "our African Americans." African Americans don't belong to anyone except to their own person.
Native Americans - In 1993, Trump, not liking the competition with casinos, took a Native American casino to court. He said that the casino was taking money away from Connecticut, churches, and the elderly because they didn't pay taxes. He further accused them of working with the mob, and that there was money laundering and other mob organized crimes. He ended this tirade by saying that they didn't look much like Indians. I guessed he thinks they should look like the stereotypical Native American? His latest insult to Native Americans is his cute little nickname for Elizabeth Warren. He is falsely claiming that she tried to register herself as a Native American to get into Harvard. She never said that, and never attended Harvard. She worked there. Calling her Pochohantas is absolutely reprehensible and offensive. When that was pointed out to him by a Native American woman, he just blew her off.
Jews - There is some ambiguity here. It would be hard to be a real estate mogul in New York City if he was anti-semitic, and I personally don't think he is actually anti-semitic, but he does know how to wedge his foot firmly in his mouth. Jews are still not too thrilled with him. He talked to Coalition of Jewish Republicans and expressed preconceived sentiments about Jewish people. He said he was a negotiator like "you folks," Referring to them as "you folks" could be taken as an insult since it is singling a race out. He also asked the room if there was anyone who didn't negotiate deals and said: "Stupidly, you want to give money...You're not going to support me because I don't want your money." The big kicker and the one that will swing a vote from Republican to Democrat is that he said he was going to remain neutral on the conflict between Israel and Palestine, and that he refused to say that Jerusalem is the undivided capital of Israel. Netanyahu has approved of Trump, and that is probably because he would love to go to war with Palestinians but is under the constraint of international pressure lead by the United States. Out of all the money we give to countries, the highest amount goes to Israel. It would be interesting to see that if by remaining neutral, Israel would still receive aid. If Trump were to come out and say that he wouldn't continue the aid to Israel, it would be a game changer in his relationship with Jews. Should it be a consolation to the Jews that he didn't claim possession of them like the African Americans?
Women...first off, let me just share this link on Trump and his relationship with women. I know there was some controversy about how one of the women were portrayed, but this article deals with the women in his life, and how he relates to them...both good and bad. Here it is -http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/15/us/politics/donald-trump-women.html It is an interesting read. Now on to specifics. From his attacks on Rosie O'Donnell. When Megyn Kelly asked him in a debate about how presidential he would be when he referred to women as "fat pigs, dogs, slobs" and "disgusting animals" he answered by saying he only said that when he was referring to Rosie O'Donnell. On Bette Midler, who was critical of him, here are two tweets. It says it all. "While @BetteMidler is an extremely unattractive woman, I refuse to say that because I always insist on being politically correct." (Should I bother to mention that he just did say that??) and here's the second... "@BetteMidler talks about my hair but I'm not allowed to talk about her ugly face or body --- so I won't. Is this a double standard?" Now on to Megyn Kelly. He attacked her in every way possible because she asked him difficult questions in a debate. She also asked hard questions of the others but Trump cannot take criticism well. The most offensive comment I heard was "The blood coming out from wherever." However, there is so much more to Megyn Kelly and Trump, and I don't feel like typing it. Here is a couple of links for ya. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/01/27/the-long-strange-history-of-the-donald-trump-megyn-kelly-feud/ and https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/01/26/here-are-the-megyn-kelly-questions-that-donald-trump-is-still-sore-about/?tid=a_inl
The Disabled: At one interview, he made fun of a physical disability that a reporter had. That is inexcusable. This one really pissed me off...so I will just share a link or two at the end. When he got called on it, he said he didn't know the reporter and didn't know that he was disabled. Actually, though, they DID know each other, enough that they were on a first name basis, and, it's important to note, that Trump knew how to imitate and mock him physically. http://money.cnn.com/2015/11/27/media/donald-trump-serge-kovaleski-disability/ and https://youtu.be/9QUYQUd0Qh8
At his rallies, he has often incited violence against protestors inside, whether they were being peaceful or not. Because of things Trump said, these protesters were often the victims of violence on behalf of the supporters or security. North Carolina was looking at charging him for inciting violence at one time. At one point he remarked that a black protester in one of his rallies deserved to be hit. I believe this was the time that the black man was being escorted out after being sucker punched. Now, of course, there is violence happening outside of rallies between both groups. I don't approve of any of it. I don't approve of fighting, sucker punches, beating up, or anything like that. There have even been acts of violence committed in the name of Trump, like two young white men beating a Latino homeless man. While Trump wasn't responsible, the words were certainly taken to heart. It should be noted that Trump has stated that he would pay for the defense of any supporter who beat up a protester (he's not) and denounced the attacks but turned around and called his supporters "passionate." And the poor homeless man that was beaten? He was American. I also thought I heard he was a veteran, but I couldn't find anything to support that.
I recently read that Donald Trump lies 91% of the time (that number may be what 91% of statements that were checked. I won't get into that, all you have to do is watch one interview to show that it's true, and if you are a Donald Trump fan, you probably stopped reading this a long time ago. But if you're interested in "Lying Don", read this... http://www.politicususa.com/2016/03/31/ninety-one-percent-donald-trump-false.html
But I will speak on his policies or lack thereof or ones he has flipped on. First off...THE WALL. I am going to share a link that shows how impossible it would be to actually build it from an engineering standpoint, but first, I'm going to talk about it. He says he's going to get Mexico to pay for this because Mexico is just rolling in the dough. To do this, he will withhold any aid we give them. Which will make Mexico even poorer, and even more will cross the border so they can get money to their families back home (and he plans to stop this practice too...though I don't know how.) There are ways to make sure that illegal immigrants don't stay here in the country. If every company has to make sure of their status. There is always going to be a problem as long as private companies hire them, paying them less than an American worker, and providing no health insurance. There should be a penalty for people who extort illegal workers because of their desperation. And what if we build some huge ass wall? Will that honestly stop illegals desperate to feed their families from coming over to work for a mere pittance? No, of course not. They can tunnel under the wall or go by boat. They can learn to rock climb, maybe set up a zip line...regardless, they will still find a way. And here's the impracticability of even bothering to build the wall... http://www.nationalmemo.com/an-engineer-explains-why-trumps-wall-is-so-implausible/
Deporting all illegal immigrants is also not feasible in the least. Is this going to be gradual, or are there are going to be a fleet of vans everywhere so police drag out whole families? Mass deportation will require more detention centers, more court buildings, and personnel. To find illegal immigrants will take untold hours of investigation, again, more personnel will be needed. And to take the illegal immigrants into custody, it will take aforementioned vans, and most importantly, the police and National Guard. As in ALL the police and National Guard. We can't pay them now. http://www.newsweek.com/how-much-would-it-cost-deport-all-undocumented-immigrants-364316
And let's talk about illegal immigrants working and Trump. On Trump Tower, 200 Polish immigrants were brought in, forced to work 12 hour days, 7 days a week, with no overtime, for $5.00 an hour. They were demolishing the building that was there before, and they weren't even provided with basic safety precautions like hard hats. Because who needs a hard hat when knocking down a tall building? Of course, this was all off the books. Trump and the construction company he used were sued because they didn't pay them!! They made a fricking $5.00 an hour and a millionaire couldn't afford it? They were taken to court, where the Polish workers won for an undisclosed amount. Even now, his current project in Washington D.C. has illegal workers on its payroll. In fact, Trump has turned down 96% of American workers. More info here... http://www.nationalreview.com/article/431933/donald-trump-foreign-workers-american-workers-arent-good-enough
He wants to bring back torture. Especially waterboarding. Of course, this is a war crime. Doesn't making any difference, though, because according to the Donald, torture brings results. No, it doesn't. There are studies that prove this, but really, all you need to do is look at it logically. If you are being tortured, wouldn't you tell them what they want to know, regardless of whether it's true or not? They are admitting something under duress, and that is never reliable.
The only way to take care of ISIS is to bomb the hell out of them. And kill their families. (Also a war crime.) If we kill their families then they will surrender. Extremists and insurgents in the Middle East BELIEVE in martyrdom. It would be a high place of honor if their families died for the cause. And if they don't feel that way, then they might be more willing to kill more innocent people...especially the Americans.
He also won't rule out nuclear weapons. Even when dealing with Europe but especially with ISIS. Where does he get his ideas for foreign policy? Reading and watching the news media!! As the presumptive nominee of the Republican party, he is entitled to daily briefings on the state of the country. Yet there is more validation in third rate "newspapers" concerning it. He has also stated in an interview (meaning I watched his mouth move when he said it.) that he thinks ALL countries should have access to nuclear weapons. No, there won't be any problem with that, will there?
His tax plan? From what economists can gather from what he said, all have pretty much stated that it will benefit the rich more and hurt the shrinking middle class more and exponentially add to the deficit...which he views as a business man and thinks it's okay to have debts. Oh, and he also wants to privatize Social Security. He admitted as much to House Speaker Paul Ryan in their secret meeting but doesn't want to make it common knowledge because his base supporters would not support him.
He has flip-flopped on abortion, transgender, homosexuality, taxing the wealthy (does not do that in "current" tax policy.), minimum wage, campaign finance, healthcare, and immigration. Basically, he believed in these (or didn't) when he wasn't a candidate, but now he is for (or against) because of the electorate.
And the campaign finance is laughable. He said he was changing it because he was self-funded and no one had any leverage over him. He may not be under the leverage of special interest groups, but he is under the leverage of the people who will be voting. Which explains the flip-flopping But the whole "self-financing" was just a bunch of bull-puckey. He has spent $43 million on his primary election cycle. And he has given the campaign his money in such a way that he could pay himself back from the campaign. This was another big story, and Trump said he wouldn't take it...but he hasn't changed that amount to a donation status yet. Now that he is the Republican candidate, he does not have the money to run. He will have to go to donors and ask for money, do fundraisers, and everything else he can to get money. Yesterday (6/9/16,) he met with 70 top donors. I don't know how much success he will have there. These are businessmen, the same as he, and it's questionable that they want to associate themselves with Trump's controversial comments that manage to insult everyone except his supporters. How desperate is Trump? He's got roughly $2.4 million in his war chest. He needs approximately $1 billion. Bernie Sanders has around $5.8 million, and Hillary Clinton has around $30.2 million. Donald Trump will now be under the thumb of his donors, special interest groups, and the Republican party. Hell, they already got him to do a speech using a teleprompter. Something that he has slammed his opponents for using. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/elections/election-2016-campaign-money-race.html
The man does not know the Constitution!! I have heard people say that he's a businessman, why should he? I am not a businesswoman, I don't even work, and I know the Constitution. I mean, it's only the one document that sets up our federal government. It isn't a big deal at all. He has criticized the Supreme Court for not passing certain laws when that isn't what the Supreme Court does. Supreme Court makes decisions on the validity of laws and/or upholding the laws based on the Constitution. CONGRESS is the entity that passes laws...and yet, it doesn't become a law until the president signs it. The president can choose to veto. He does not understand the concept of Separation of Powers. He seems to think he can run roughshod over everything. That if he wants it to happen, it will. Whether this is our military leaders following his orders, even if illegal, to trampling on the First Amendment. He hates the press...mostly because they lambast him all the time. So he's going to open up the libel laws so that the media can be charged for publishing things that are critical, I assume, of Trump. Basically taking away the right to a free press. What I want clarified is what constitutes critical media? The facts as everyone else sees them, or the facts as Trump sees them? Of course, it will be Trump's way, and I wouldn't be surprised if he had an approved list of reporters that are okay. Or will he just ditch the reporters and have a state sponsored media? How far will he take this propaganda bullshit? And what rights are we going to lose besides the freedom of the press? The right to free speech? Do you think that Trump would like what I was saying about him here? Yeah, I might be in trouble for speaking my mind. Once one right goes, all others follows.
Let's discuss his role of Commander in Chief, shall we? He is extremely thin skinned and responds without thinking, and often like a child. He is also a liar and has not established one thing that established a solid view on except the wall and deporting illegal aliens...both of which he won't be able to do. Do you really trust him with our entire arsenal, nuclear launch codes, and the lives of our troops? He has already stated that he will send 30,000 troops to defeat ISIS. I think it has been proven that defeating a terrorist group using standard warfare does not work. In other words, he would be sending our troops there to die in vain. And in other regions, he is going to withdraw troops that are there to keep the peace. Maybe we won't have to wait for Trump to use the nuclear launch codes, we might die by another country's nuclear bombs.
Veterans come up next. I'm going to start with something that I'm really surprised didn't knock him off early in the primary. He stated that Senator John McCain was not a true war hero because he was captured. He went on to say he prefers those that weren't captured. WHAT THE FUCK?? While Trump was off getting his deferments, John McCain was shot down with a surface to air missile on October 26, 1967. In the crash, he had broken his right leg and both arms. He also nearly drowned when he landed in a lake. He woke up in a North Vietnamese POW camp. There really is no detailed account except that he was beaten repeatedly, and badly enough that he was thinking about suicide. His father was high up in the Navy and his captors offered him his release. He would only accept if all the POW's were released. It was only after then that he was tortured. He passed the easy road out of a horrible situation to try and save his fellow POWs. That is a true war hero. And so is every soldier who became a Prisoner of War and was tortured. Let me expand that...if a soldier dons a uniform and goes overseas to protect our country and its interests, then they are heros...period. It doesn't matter to me whether they are captured and released, captured and killed, killed, wounded, comes home with psychiatric scars, or comes home with no injury, THEY ARE HEROES!! These men, women, and animals have stood on a fence and vowed to not let anyone through, not on their watch. (Yes, I borrowed from "A Few Good Men.") If someone doesn't feel that way, then they are total dicks (and I don't resort to calling people names lightly.) We are living in the freedom they provided.
Trump has said many things, and one of them is to privatize the VA. That is not an answer to the problem. Nor is firing everyone. And lying about raising money for veterans is just plain disgraceful. On January 28th, he had a fundraiser for veterans. He held it because he didn't want to appear at a Republican Debate where Megyn Kelly was moderating. She had hurt his feelings the last time she moderated. Anyway, he bragged about raising $6 million, including $1 million of his own money. A few weeks ago, the press had found out that the money hadn't been distributed, and that Trump had never given his 1 million. The revelation made Trump look very bad. He even had veterans protesting outside Trump Tower. He was shamed into distributing the funds, including his, to veterans' groups. And he was particularly acerbic with the press afterward, hurling insults, calling people names, and stating that he had wanted to give the donations privately. And I call bullshit. He held a very public fundraiser on national television, and when he gave money (yes, he had cut some checks, but the bulk wasn't donated until the day the story came out.), he would have members of that charity stand there with a big old check so everyone could see how generous he was.
As already stated, he knows little of foreign policy or diplomacy. Trump does not even have knowledge of current events that are happening in Europe. He wants to withdraw our troops and break treaties and alliances with our allies. Especially with countries like Japan and South Korea. As far as he cares, any war that is started in that area he is quoted to say "Have a good time!" Does he know that a war in that area will most likely involve nuclear weapons? And then there is leaving NATO. No, not a good idea. We are in a global society, and we must interact as such. Organizations such as NATO are vital for the security of each signatory country. For more information on NATO (I promise, if you read this, you will more fully understand it and its importance more than Trump does.) http://schoolworkhelper.net/north-atlantic-treaty-organization-nato-historical-significance/
Not only does Trump not have a clue on foreign policy (he knows all about Russia because the Miss Universe Pageant was held there one year and the USA will be good friends with them) but he has managed to insult our allies. Our closest ally, England, actually had hearings about banning him from entering Great Britain. He also insulted Prime Minister Cameron and Mayor-Elect Sadiq Khan, calling them stupid and challenging them to an IQ test. This was his response to Cameron and Khan telling the media that they would not go to the United States on principal if we banned all Muslims for entering. This would include Mayor-Elect Khan, who is Muslim. In the meantime, Russian dictator Putin loves him, and North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un is encouraging Americans to vote for him. Why? Because if Trump is president then Kim Jong Un can invade South Korea and Japan without interference. ISIS is already using Trump's racial slurs against Muslims for recruitment videos. So under Trump, we have our allies debating about banning him and our enemies using him to recruit violent individuals for terrorist attacks. Nice. I feel safe, do you? And only God knows what will happen with presidential executive orders.
Let's talk trade for just a bit. I don't know much about it, admittedly, but there is just some stuff that is hinky to me. He wants to penalize companies at a 35% tax rate for those that move some operations overseas or to Mexico. He used Ford as an example, which wasn't too smart, because even though they are building a factory in Mexico, they also built one or two here and created oodles of jobs. Plus, it is never wise to use a car company as an example. We have an American built Saturn, that has a Honda engine, most likely built in Japan. This is very common among all car manufacturers. But I digress...see, he can't institute that 35% tax...only Congress can. And then there are those companies (Trump International) that have all their products made in countries (China) that give low wages and no benefits to extremely poor people. Will he allow his company to be punished?? Yeah, not going to happen.
Litigation...a big part of Trump's businesses and personal life. He sues for the least of things and has been the defendant in quite a few. Right now, as mentioned previously because of his racial slurs against the judge, he is being sued in two states over "Trump University." The University that never was. There are a couple of class action lawsuits, one which may turn into a RICO case (under Judge Curiel) in California and charges in New York. Investigations were started in Texas and Florida until those attorney generals got generous campaign contributions. So what are the ethics on this? Informed readers should want to know. Here is an article on his lawsuits. And we wonder why the courts are all backed up!! http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/06/01/donald-trump-lawsuits-legal-battles/84995854/
And he is a hypocrite. He has used Bill Clinton's infidelities against Hillary Clinton. He has called Bill Clinton a sexual predator and blamed Hillary for not getting the job done. I don't agree with what President Clinton did. Not in the least. However, he is not a sexual predator! He did not rape anyone. It was all consensual. If a woman had no interest, he didn't force himself on her. And as far as Hillary goes...she had to go through the worst pain and humiliation in public. She held herself high, and I admire her for that. I also admire that she kept her marriage together, despite the pain she had to go through. Now, let's talk about the Donald. He was cheating on his first wife, Ivana, with his 2nd wife, Marla Maples. In fact, that affair kind of blew up his first marriage. I don't see a difference between him and Bill Clinton. They both were real shits for what they did to their wives. The difference was that Hillary was able to keep her marriage going when Ivana couldn't (and I don't blame her.)
In fact, there is very good evidence for why Ivana didn't stay with him. I know that this has been refuted by Ivana, who originally said this in a deposition during their divorce. She later claimed it wasn't true, but I really doubt that. Between a deposition and a statement afterward, probably spurred on by Trump and his attorneys, I choose the deposition. Apparently, Trump had plastic surgery on his scalp, by a surgeon recommended by Ivana. He didn't like it, or the pain, and he started fighting with her. He threw her on the bed and ripped her hair out. It was at that time, he also ripped off her clothes and raped her. When it was over, she ran to another room crying and locked the door. The next morning, when he saw her, he asked if it hurt. She looked over to the bed and her hair was all over it. This was a violent attack. The sex was against her consent. That is a perfect example of marital rape. Trump's current attorney said that a woman can't be raped by her husband...rather ignorantly because it is recognized as rape. This was amid all the threats the lawyer made about suing people who published this incident. Was all the fluster because it was true? Like I said, it came from a deposition. I was shocked when this came out and it was treated as no big deal. It was early on in his campaign too. I do not want a man capable of that kind of violence representing my country. If anyone else doesn't mind, well, shame on them.
And then there is Ivana and the way she was treated by her beloved husband (as if her rape wasn't enough.) At the time of their marriage, he had Ivana sign a prenup for $20.000 (later increased to 10 million.) HOWEVER, she would get a $250,000 payment for each child she had. He was also quoted as saying he would never give Ivana expensive jewelry or artwork, because why should he give her negotiable assets? She ran two of his hotels/casino - Castle Trump in Atlantic City, NJ, and The Plaza Hotel in New York City, and she ran them really well. Both were a success. With her doing such a great job, you would think that she made decent money. Her salary was $1.00 a year. It looks to me like she was just a business transaction. She was there to pop out kids for him. She was his possession. Which explains the rape. If he doesn't look at her as a woman, it's much easier, isn't it? She was his property. I'm glad she's out of that marriage. No woman should have to deal with a husband like that, no matter how much money he has. And does it really surprise you that I'm about to share a link here: http://www.vanityfair.com/magazine/2015/07/donald-ivana-trump-divorce-prenup-marie-brenner
Just a quick note on his daughter Ivanka (mother is Ivana.) and her siblings. Damn, that dude is just creepy when it comes to his daughter...really, really creepy. While a 16-year old Ivanka was onstage at a Miss Universe Pageant, he asked the current Miss Universe if she thought that Ivanka was hot? She was shocked, he asked several times and started talking about her body!! Now see, if this happened to my daughter, I would be in court trying to get parental rights stripped. It is just wrong for a father to sexualize his daughter in that way. As an adult, he has stated that if Ivanka were not his daughter, he would date her. Yup, that's just what I want my father to say about me in public. If he were my father, I'd cut off ties with him. Oddly, while Trump puts Ivanka out there as a showpiece, there is no mention of his youngest daughter, Tiffany, the daughter he shares with Marla Maples. She is also very beautiful but apparently doesn't tweak the "right" feelings with good old Dad. She is currently in college, studying Sociology. Has growing up in California away from dear old dad maybe saved her from his worst traits? As far as the two sons, I don't know much about them, except that they are big game hunters and that one of them had his picture taken holding an elephant tail. That is enough for me to dislike them.
This is one of the more humorous things to come out of the campaign. And all I got to say is "Wow." Apparently, Trump used to call media outlets, giving them a fake name as someone in the PR Department, and would talk about how great he was. Especially about his sexual prowess, and how the women just fell all around him in abject adoration. And the Trump campaign was embarrassed. Trump said it wasn't him, but it so obviously was. With the particular recording that was released, he had told the reporter weeks later that it was him. It's funny, especially how much he desperately tried to refute it. Apparently, it was so embarrassing that even Trump knew that.
In conclusion (finally), Donald J Trump, by his very behavior, should not be President of the United States. He has no experience, doesn't know how to act presidential in any way. He is immature..lashing out at people who dare criticize him. When he engaged in something involving Cruz and a picture of Cruz's wife, his excuse for getting in the fray? "He started it." Really? "He started it?" What are we, in kindergarten?? Then there's the whole Marco Rubio thing with the hands. Because it's so presidential to talk about how big one's penis is. He lies, and he lies, and no matter how bad these lies are, or how stupid it sounds, or the plausibility of it, he keeps on telling them. He does unscrupulous practices and gets caught all the time, and when he gets caught, you better damn well know that it wasn't his fault. It was his earpiece, or what someone said, or what his goldfish told him...whatever he can come up with. No matter how preposterous, he will shift the blame to it. Accountability isn't a part of his vocabulary. If he doesn't get his way, he has a grand old "Trump Temper Tantrum." His arrogance knows no boundaries, along with his ability to brag and name drop. Another thing that knows no bonds? His hypocrisy. And he will say anything to get elected. The Republican leadership thinks that they can control him. They haven't got a chance. They say that the separation of powers will control him and that he will have White House counsel. The Republican leadership really doesn't have a clue, and that excuse is too flimsy to take a chance on. His own campaign has been trying to get him to act more presidential. It hasn't worked very well. Bottomline...Trump is an infantile, temper tantrum throwing, racist, bigot, Islamaphobic, xenophobic, misogynistic, hypocritical, always blame someone else, hold no accountability, pathological lying asshole who doesn't deserve to take care of that talking fish, much less lead this great country.
.
Native Americans - In 1993, Trump, not liking the competition with casinos, took a Native American casino to court. He said that the casino was taking money away from Connecticut, churches, and the elderly because they didn't pay taxes. He further accused them of working with the mob, and that there was money laundering and other mob organized crimes. He ended this tirade by saying that they didn't look much like Indians. I guessed he thinks they should look like the stereotypical Native American? His latest insult to Native Americans is his cute little nickname for Elizabeth Warren. He is falsely claiming that she tried to register herself as a Native American to get into Harvard. She never said that, and never attended Harvard. She worked there. Calling her Pochohantas is absolutely reprehensible and offensive. When that was pointed out to him by a Native American woman, he just blew her off.
Jews - There is some ambiguity here. It would be hard to be a real estate mogul in New York City if he was anti-semitic, and I personally don't think he is actually anti-semitic, but he does know how to wedge his foot firmly in his mouth. Jews are still not too thrilled with him. He talked to Coalition of Jewish Republicans and expressed preconceived sentiments about Jewish people. He said he was a negotiator like "you folks," Referring to them as "you folks" could be taken as an insult since it is singling a race out. He also asked the room if there was anyone who didn't negotiate deals and said: "Stupidly, you want to give money...You're not going to support me because I don't want your money." The big kicker and the one that will swing a vote from Republican to Democrat is that he said he was going to remain neutral on the conflict between Israel and Palestine, and that he refused to say that Jerusalem is the undivided capital of Israel. Netanyahu has approved of Trump, and that is probably because he would love to go to war with Palestinians but is under the constraint of international pressure lead by the United States. Out of all the money we give to countries, the highest amount goes to Israel. It would be interesting to see that if by remaining neutral, Israel would still receive aid. If Trump were to come out and say that he wouldn't continue the aid to Israel, it would be a game changer in his relationship with Jews. Should it be a consolation to the Jews that he didn't claim possession of them like the African Americans?
Women...first off, let me just share this link on Trump and his relationship with women. I know there was some controversy about how one of the women were portrayed, but this article deals with the women in his life, and how he relates to them...both good and bad. Here it is -http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/15/us/politics/donald-trump-women.html It is an interesting read. Now on to specifics. From his attacks on Rosie O'Donnell. When Megyn Kelly asked him in a debate about how presidential he would be when he referred to women as "fat pigs, dogs, slobs" and "disgusting animals" he answered by saying he only said that when he was referring to Rosie O'Donnell. On Bette Midler, who was critical of him, here are two tweets. It says it all. "While @BetteMidler is an extremely unattractive woman, I refuse to say that because I always insist on being politically correct." (Should I bother to mention that he just did say that??) and here's the second... "@BetteMidler talks about my hair but I'm not allowed to talk about her ugly face or body --- so I won't. Is this a double standard?" Now on to Megyn Kelly. He attacked her in every way possible because she asked him difficult questions in a debate. She also asked hard questions of the others but Trump cannot take criticism well. The most offensive comment I heard was "The blood coming out from wherever." However, there is so much more to Megyn Kelly and Trump, and I don't feel like typing it. Here is a couple of links for ya. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/01/27/the-long-strange-history-of-the-donald-trump-megyn-kelly-feud/ and https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/01/26/here-are-the-megyn-kelly-questions-that-donald-trump-is-still-sore-about/?tid=a_inl
The Disabled: At one interview, he made fun of a physical disability that a reporter had. That is inexcusable. This one really pissed me off...so I will just share a link or two at the end. When he got called on it, he said he didn't know the reporter and didn't know that he was disabled. Actually, though, they DID know each other, enough that they were on a first name basis, and, it's important to note, that Trump knew how to imitate and mock him physically. http://money.cnn.com/2015/11/27/media/donald-trump-serge-kovaleski-disability/ and https://youtu.be/9QUYQUd0Qh8
At his rallies, he has often incited violence against protestors inside, whether they were being peaceful or not. Because of things Trump said, these protesters were often the victims of violence on behalf of the supporters or security. North Carolina was looking at charging him for inciting violence at one time. At one point he remarked that a black protester in one of his rallies deserved to be hit. I believe this was the time that the black man was being escorted out after being sucker punched. Now, of course, there is violence happening outside of rallies between both groups. I don't approve of any of it. I don't approve of fighting, sucker punches, beating up, or anything like that. There have even been acts of violence committed in the name of Trump, like two young white men beating a Latino homeless man. While Trump wasn't responsible, the words were certainly taken to heart. It should be noted that Trump has stated that he would pay for the defense of any supporter who beat up a protester (he's not) and denounced the attacks but turned around and called his supporters "passionate." And the poor homeless man that was beaten? He was American. I also thought I heard he was a veteran, but I couldn't find anything to support that.
I recently read that Donald Trump lies 91% of the time (that number may be what 91% of statements that were checked. I won't get into that, all you have to do is watch one interview to show that it's true, and if you are a Donald Trump fan, you probably stopped reading this a long time ago. But if you're interested in "Lying Don", read this... http://www.politicususa.com/2016/03/31/ninety-one-percent-donald-trump-false.html
But I will speak on his policies or lack thereof or ones he has flipped on. First off...THE WALL. I am going to share a link that shows how impossible it would be to actually build it from an engineering standpoint, but first, I'm going to talk about it. He says he's going to get Mexico to pay for this because Mexico is just rolling in the dough. To do this, he will withhold any aid we give them. Which will make Mexico even poorer, and even more will cross the border so they can get money to their families back home (and he plans to stop this practice too...though I don't know how.) There are ways to make sure that illegal immigrants don't stay here in the country. If every company has to make sure of their status. There is always going to be a problem as long as private companies hire them, paying them less than an American worker, and providing no health insurance. There should be a penalty for people who extort illegal workers because of their desperation. And what if we build some huge ass wall? Will that honestly stop illegals desperate to feed their families from coming over to work for a mere pittance? No, of course not. They can tunnel under the wall or go by boat. They can learn to rock climb, maybe set up a zip line...regardless, they will still find a way. And here's the impracticability of even bothering to build the wall... http://www.nationalmemo.com/an-engineer-explains-why-trumps-wall-is-so-implausible/
Deporting all illegal immigrants is also not feasible in the least. Is this going to be gradual, or are there are going to be a fleet of vans everywhere so police drag out whole families? Mass deportation will require more detention centers, more court buildings, and personnel. To find illegal immigrants will take untold hours of investigation, again, more personnel will be needed. And to take the illegal immigrants into custody, it will take aforementioned vans, and most importantly, the police and National Guard. As in ALL the police and National Guard. We can't pay them now. http://www.newsweek.com/how-much-would-it-cost-deport-all-undocumented-immigrants-364316
And let's talk about illegal immigrants working and Trump. On Trump Tower, 200 Polish immigrants were brought in, forced to work 12 hour days, 7 days a week, with no overtime, for $5.00 an hour. They were demolishing the building that was there before, and they weren't even provided with basic safety precautions like hard hats. Because who needs a hard hat when knocking down a tall building? Of course, this was all off the books. Trump and the construction company he used were sued because they didn't pay them!! They made a fricking $5.00 an hour and a millionaire couldn't afford it? They were taken to court, where the Polish workers won for an undisclosed amount. Even now, his current project in Washington D.C. has illegal workers on its payroll. In fact, Trump has turned down 96% of American workers. More info here... http://www.nationalreview.com/article/431933/donald-trump-foreign-workers-american-workers-arent-good-enough
He wants to bring back torture. Especially waterboarding. Of course, this is a war crime. Doesn't making any difference, though, because according to the Donald, torture brings results. No, it doesn't. There are studies that prove this, but really, all you need to do is look at it logically. If you are being tortured, wouldn't you tell them what they want to know, regardless of whether it's true or not? They are admitting something under duress, and that is never reliable.
The only way to take care of ISIS is to bomb the hell out of them. And kill their families. (Also a war crime.) If we kill their families then they will surrender. Extremists and insurgents in the Middle East BELIEVE in martyrdom. It would be a high place of honor if their families died for the cause. And if they don't feel that way, then they might be more willing to kill more innocent people...especially the Americans.
He also won't rule out nuclear weapons. Even when dealing with Europe but especially with ISIS. Where does he get his ideas for foreign policy? Reading and watching the news media!! As the presumptive nominee of the Republican party, he is entitled to daily briefings on the state of the country. Yet there is more validation in third rate "newspapers" concerning it. He has also stated in an interview (meaning I watched his mouth move when he said it.) that he thinks ALL countries should have access to nuclear weapons. No, there won't be any problem with that, will there?
His tax plan? From what economists can gather from what he said, all have pretty much stated that it will benefit the rich more and hurt the shrinking middle class more and exponentially add to the deficit...which he views as a business man and thinks it's okay to have debts. Oh, and he also wants to privatize Social Security. He admitted as much to House Speaker Paul Ryan in their secret meeting but doesn't want to make it common knowledge because his base supporters would not support him.
He has flip-flopped on abortion, transgender, homosexuality, taxing the wealthy (does not do that in "current" tax policy.), minimum wage, campaign finance, healthcare, and immigration. Basically, he believed in these (or didn't) when he wasn't a candidate, but now he is for (or against) because of the electorate.
And the campaign finance is laughable. He said he was changing it because he was self-funded and no one had any leverage over him. He may not be under the leverage of special interest groups, but he is under the leverage of the people who will be voting. Which explains the flip-flopping But the whole "self-financing" was just a bunch of bull-puckey. He has spent $43 million on his primary election cycle. And he has given the campaign his money in such a way that he could pay himself back from the campaign. This was another big story, and Trump said he wouldn't take it...but he hasn't changed that amount to a donation status yet. Now that he is the Republican candidate, he does not have the money to run. He will have to go to donors and ask for money, do fundraisers, and everything else he can to get money. Yesterday (6/9/16,) he met with 70 top donors. I don't know how much success he will have there. These are businessmen, the same as he, and it's questionable that they want to associate themselves with Trump's controversial comments that manage to insult everyone except his supporters. How desperate is Trump? He's got roughly $2.4 million in his war chest. He needs approximately $1 billion. Bernie Sanders has around $5.8 million, and Hillary Clinton has around $30.2 million. Donald Trump will now be under the thumb of his donors, special interest groups, and the Republican party. Hell, they already got him to do a speech using a teleprompter. Something that he has slammed his opponents for using. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/elections/election-2016-campaign-money-race.html
The man does not know the Constitution!! I have heard people say that he's a businessman, why should he? I am not a businesswoman, I don't even work, and I know the Constitution. I mean, it's only the one document that sets up our federal government. It isn't a big deal at all. He has criticized the Supreme Court for not passing certain laws when that isn't what the Supreme Court does. Supreme Court makes decisions on the validity of laws and/or upholding the laws based on the Constitution. CONGRESS is the entity that passes laws...and yet, it doesn't become a law until the president signs it. The president can choose to veto. He does not understand the concept of Separation of Powers. He seems to think he can run roughshod over everything. That if he wants it to happen, it will. Whether this is our military leaders following his orders, even if illegal, to trampling on the First Amendment. He hates the press...mostly because they lambast him all the time. So he's going to open up the libel laws so that the media can be charged for publishing things that are critical, I assume, of Trump. Basically taking away the right to a free press. What I want clarified is what constitutes critical media? The facts as everyone else sees them, or the facts as Trump sees them? Of course, it will be Trump's way, and I wouldn't be surprised if he had an approved list of reporters that are okay. Or will he just ditch the reporters and have a state sponsored media? How far will he take this propaganda bullshit? And what rights are we going to lose besides the freedom of the press? The right to free speech? Do you think that Trump would like what I was saying about him here? Yeah, I might be in trouble for speaking my mind. Once one right goes, all others follows.
Let's discuss his role of Commander in Chief, shall we? He is extremely thin skinned and responds without thinking, and often like a child. He is also a liar and has not established one thing that established a solid view on except the wall and deporting illegal aliens...both of which he won't be able to do. Do you really trust him with our entire arsenal, nuclear launch codes, and the lives of our troops? He has already stated that he will send 30,000 troops to defeat ISIS. I think it has been proven that defeating a terrorist group using standard warfare does not work. In other words, he would be sending our troops there to die in vain. And in other regions, he is going to withdraw troops that are there to keep the peace. Maybe we won't have to wait for Trump to use the nuclear launch codes, we might die by another country's nuclear bombs.
Veterans come up next. I'm going to start with something that I'm really surprised didn't knock him off early in the primary. He stated that Senator John McCain was not a true war hero because he was captured. He went on to say he prefers those that weren't captured. WHAT THE FUCK?? While Trump was off getting his deferments, John McCain was shot down with a surface to air missile on October 26, 1967. In the crash, he had broken his right leg and both arms. He also nearly drowned when he landed in a lake. He woke up in a North Vietnamese POW camp. There really is no detailed account except that he was beaten repeatedly, and badly enough that he was thinking about suicide. His father was high up in the Navy and his captors offered him his release. He would only accept if all the POW's were released. It was only after then that he was tortured. He passed the easy road out of a horrible situation to try and save his fellow POWs. That is a true war hero. And so is every soldier who became a Prisoner of War and was tortured. Let me expand that...if a soldier dons a uniform and goes overseas to protect our country and its interests, then they are heros...period. It doesn't matter to me whether they are captured and released, captured and killed, killed, wounded, comes home with psychiatric scars, or comes home with no injury, THEY ARE HEROES!! These men, women, and animals have stood on a fence and vowed to not let anyone through, not on their watch. (Yes, I borrowed from "A Few Good Men.") If someone doesn't feel that way, then they are total dicks (and I don't resort to calling people names lightly.) We are living in the freedom they provided.
Trump has said many things, and one of them is to privatize the VA. That is not an answer to the problem. Nor is firing everyone. And lying about raising money for veterans is just plain disgraceful. On January 28th, he had a fundraiser for veterans. He held it because he didn't want to appear at a Republican Debate where Megyn Kelly was moderating. She had hurt his feelings the last time she moderated. Anyway, he bragged about raising $6 million, including $1 million of his own money. A few weeks ago, the press had found out that the money hadn't been distributed, and that Trump had never given his 1 million. The revelation made Trump look very bad. He even had veterans protesting outside Trump Tower. He was shamed into distributing the funds, including his, to veterans' groups. And he was particularly acerbic with the press afterward, hurling insults, calling people names, and stating that he had wanted to give the donations privately. And I call bullshit. He held a very public fundraiser on national television, and when he gave money (yes, he had cut some checks, but the bulk wasn't donated until the day the story came out.), he would have members of that charity stand there with a big old check so everyone could see how generous he was.
As already stated, he knows little of foreign policy or diplomacy. Trump does not even have knowledge of current events that are happening in Europe. He wants to withdraw our troops and break treaties and alliances with our allies. Especially with countries like Japan and South Korea. As far as he cares, any war that is started in that area he is quoted to say "Have a good time!" Does he know that a war in that area will most likely involve nuclear weapons? And then there is leaving NATO. No, not a good idea. We are in a global society, and we must interact as such. Organizations such as NATO are vital for the security of each signatory country. For more information on NATO (I promise, if you read this, you will more fully understand it and its importance more than Trump does.) http://schoolworkhelper.net/north-atlantic-treaty-organization-nato-historical-significance/
Not only does Trump not have a clue on foreign policy (he knows all about Russia because the Miss Universe Pageant was held there one year and the USA will be good friends with them) but he has managed to insult our allies. Our closest ally, England, actually had hearings about banning him from entering Great Britain. He also insulted Prime Minister Cameron and Mayor-Elect Sadiq Khan, calling them stupid and challenging them to an IQ test. This was his response to Cameron and Khan telling the media that they would not go to the United States on principal if we banned all Muslims for entering. This would include Mayor-Elect Khan, who is Muslim. In the meantime, Russian dictator Putin loves him, and North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un is encouraging Americans to vote for him. Why? Because if Trump is president then Kim Jong Un can invade South Korea and Japan without interference. ISIS is already using Trump's racial slurs against Muslims for recruitment videos. So under Trump, we have our allies debating about banning him and our enemies using him to recruit violent individuals for terrorist attacks. Nice. I feel safe, do you? And only God knows what will happen with presidential executive orders.
Let's talk trade for just a bit. I don't know much about it, admittedly, but there is just some stuff that is hinky to me. He wants to penalize companies at a 35% tax rate for those that move some operations overseas or to Mexico. He used Ford as an example, which wasn't too smart, because even though they are building a factory in Mexico, they also built one or two here and created oodles of jobs. Plus, it is never wise to use a car company as an example. We have an American built Saturn, that has a Honda engine, most likely built in Japan. This is very common among all car manufacturers. But I digress...see, he can't institute that 35% tax...only Congress can. And then there are those companies (Trump International) that have all their products made in countries (China) that give low wages and no benefits to extremely poor people. Will he allow his company to be punished?? Yeah, not going to happen.
Litigation...a big part of Trump's businesses and personal life. He sues for the least of things and has been the defendant in quite a few. Right now, as mentioned previously because of his racial slurs against the judge, he is being sued in two states over "Trump University." The University that never was. There are a couple of class action lawsuits, one which may turn into a RICO case (under Judge Curiel) in California and charges in New York. Investigations were started in Texas and Florida until those attorney generals got generous campaign contributions. So what are the ethics on this? Informed readers should want to know. Here is an article on his lawsuits. And we wonder why the courts are all backed up!! http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/06/01/donald-trump-lawsuits-legal-battles/84995854/
And he is a hypocrite. He has used Bill Clinton's infidelities against Hillary Clinton. He has called Bill Clinton a sexual predator and blamed Hillary for not getting the job done. I don't agree with what President Clinton did. Not in the least. However, he is not a sexual predator! He did not rape anyone. It was all consensual. If a woman had no interest, he didn't force himself on her. And as far as Hillary goes...she had to go through the worst pain and humiliation in public. She held herself high, and I admire her for that. I also admire that she kept her marriage together, despite the pain she had to go through. Now, let's talk about the Donald. He was cheating on his first wife, Ivana, with his 2nd wife, Marla Maples. In fact, that affair kind of blew up his first marriage. I don't see a difference between him and Bill Clinton. They both were real shits for what they did to their wives. The difference was that Hillary was able to keep her marriage going when Ivana couldn't (and I don't blame her.)
In fact, there is very good evidence for why Ivana didn't stay with him. I know that this has been refuted by Ivana, who originally said this in a deposition during their divorce. She later claimed it wasn't true, but I really doubt that. Between a deposition and a statement afterward, probably spurred on by Trump and his attorneys, I choose the deposition. Apparently, Trump had plastic surgery on his scalp, by a surgeon recommended by Ivana. He didn't like it, or the pain, and he started fighting with her. He threw her on the bed and ripped her hair out. It was at that time, he also ripped off her clothes and raped her. When it was over, she ran to another room crying and locked the door. The next morning, when he saw her, he asked if it hurt. She looked over to the bed and her hair was all over it. This was a violent attack. The sex was against her consent. That is a perfect example of marital rape. Trump's current attorney said that a woman can't be raped by her husband...rather ignorantly because it is recognized as rape. This was amid all the threats the lawyer made about suing people who published this incident. Was all the fluster because it was true? Like I said, it came from a deposition. I was shocked when this came out and it was treated as no big deal. It was early on in his campaign too. I do not want a man capable of that kind of violence representing my country. If anyone else doesn't mind, well, shame on them.
And then there is Ivana and the way she was treated by her beloved husband (as if her rape wasn't enough.) At the time of their marriage, he had Ivana sign a prenup for $20.000 (later increased to 10 million.) HOWEVER, she would get a $250,000 payment for each child she had. He was also quoted as saying he would never give Ivana expensive jewelry or artwork, because why should he give her negotiable assets? She ran two of his hotels/casino - Castle Trump in Atlantic City, NJ, and The Plaza Hotel in New York City, and she ran them really well. Both were a success. With her doing such a great job, you would think that she made decent money. Her salary was $1.00 a year. It looks to me like she was just a business transaction. She was there to pop out kids for him. She was his possession. Which explains the rape. If he doesn't look at her as a woman, it's much easier, isn't it? She was his property. I'm glad she's out of that marriage. No woman should have to deal with a husband like that, no matter how much money he has. And does it really surprise you that I'm about to share a link here: http://www.vanityfair.com/magazine/2015/07/donald-ivana-trump-divorce-prenup-marie-brenner
Just a quick note on his daughter Ivanka (mother is Ivana.) and her siblings. Damn, that dude is just creepy when it comes to his daughter...really, really creepy. While a 16-year old Ivanka was onstage at a Miss Universe Pageant, he asked the current Miss Universe if she thought that Ivanka was hot? She was shocked, he asked several times and started talking about her body!! Now see, if this happened to my daughter, I would be in court trying to get parental rights stripped. It is just wrong for a father to sexualize his daughter in that way. As an adult, he has stated that if Ivanka were not his daughter, he would date her. Yup, that's just what I want my father to say about me in public. If he were my father, I'd cut off ties with him. Oddly, while Trump puts Ivanka out there as a showpiece, there is no mention of his youngest daughter, Tiffany, the daughter he shares with Marla Maples. She is also very beautiful but apparently doesn't tweak the "right" feelings with good old Dad. She is currently in college, studying Sociology. Has growing up in California away from dear old dad maybe saved her from his worst traits? As far as the two sons, I don't know much about them, except that they are big game hunters and that one of them had his picture taken holding an elephant tail. That is enough for me to dislike them.
This is one of the more humorous things to come out of the campaign. And all I got to say is "Wow." Apparently, Trump used to call media outlets, giving them a fake name as someone in the PR Department, and would talk about how great he was. Especially about his sexual prowess, and how the women just fell all around him in abject adoration. And the Trump campaign was embarrassed. Trump said it wasn't him, but it so obviously was. With the particular recording that was released, he had told the reporter weeks later that it was him. It's funny, especially how much he desperately tried to refute it. Apparently, it was so embarrassing that even Trump knew that.
In conclusion (finally), Donald J Trump, by his very behavior, should not be President of the United States. He has no experience, doesn't know how to act presidential in any way. He is immature..lashing out at people who dare criticize him. When he engaged in something involving Cruz and a picture of Cruz's wife, his excuse for getting in the fray? "He started it." Really? "He started it?" What are we, in kindergarten?? Then there's the whole Marco Rubio thing with the hands. Because it's so presidential to talk about how big one's penis is. He lies, and he lies, and no matter how bad these lies are, or how stupid it sounds, or the plausibility of it, he keeps on telling them. He does unscrupulous practices and gets caught all the time, and when he gets caught, you better damn well know that it wasn't his fault. It was his earpiece, or what someone said, or what his goldfish told him...whatever he can come up with. No matter how preposterous, he will shift the blame to it. Accountability isn't a part of his vocabulary. If he doesn't get his way, he has a grand old "Trump Temper Tantrum." His arrogance knows no boundaries, along with his ability to brag and name drop. Another thing that knows no bonds? His hypocrisy. And he will say anything to get elected. The Republican leadership thinks that they can control him. They haven't got a chance. They say that the separation of powers will control him and that he will have White House counsel. The Republican leadership really doesn't have a clue, and that excuse is too flimsy to take a chance on. His own campaign has been trying to get him to act more presidential. It hasn't worked very well. Bottomline...Trump is an infantile, temper tantrum throwing, racist, bigot, Islamaphobic, xenophobic, misogynistic, hypocritical, always blame someone else, hold no accountability, pathological lying asshole who doesn't deserve to take care of that talking fish, much less lead this great country.
.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)