Predictable: Trump Launches Plan to Buy Votes with OUR Money


And so it begins.  Who would’ve predicted this?  Oh that’s right – we did.  And it didn’t take long.

Yesterday, Donald Trump and his daughter, Ivanka, unveiled a plan that “makes childcare more affordable.”  Definitely it will be more affordable, lucrative even, for the poor families who will receive yet more subsidies in the form of hand-outs via the tax code.  Usually this is a favorite way for Democrats to stealthily steal money from tax payers and reward their base but that sly Donald Trump is going to challenge them at their own game.  From CBS News yesterday:

“Under Trump’s proposed plan, there would also be additional tax incentives on the employer side to provide on-site child care.”


“Those who have no tax liability, who are on the low end of the income scale, would be allowed to claim an expanded Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), equivalent to half of their payroll tax contribution.” 


“In addition to the child care expense deduction, Trump would also guarantee six weeks of paid maternity leave. This, the aide said, would be paid for by eliminating fraud in the unemployment insurance program, estimated to be about $3.4 billion.”


Trump would also offer dependent care savings accounts available to everybody in the U.S. Those on the lower end of the income scale, would see the government contribute $500 for every $1,000 contributed by individuals. Everybody else would be allowed to contribute up to $2,000 to this account tax-free, and this flex spending account could be rolled over each year.

I just have one question for Mr. Trump, and no, the question is not, “How are you going to pay for this?”  That’s the question liberals and faux conservatives are asking.  Instead I would ask the question that any principled conservative should ask, which is:

What gives you the right to forcibly take money from one American and give it to another American to pay for their childcare? 

This is a question of rights.  The right to decide what we do with the money that we earn.  After that it’s a question of consequences.  What is the consequence for choosing to have children before you can afford them?  If Trump has his way there will be no consequence because the rest of us – even if we did things the right way and put off having our own children until we could afford it – will now be forced to subsidize irresponsible choices made by others.

What you reward, you get more of.

This kind of socialism is what you get when you nominate a “Republican” who holds no conservative principles, and YES, we told you so.

Donald Trump introduced his ingenious plan with his usual flare for words:  “It’s a big thing. Wow. I’m hearing wow. I like to hear wow. The congresswomen like to hear wow. Makes your life a lot easier, right?”

At one Trump-loving site the rationalizing has already begun:   “Honestly, who can afford childcare these days?  Something needs to be done about it.  Hell, Reagan wanted to address it back in the 80’s yet nothing was ever done about it….The kids are our future.”

It takes a village, eh?  In the words of that colorful populist, Mr. Trump……Wow.




Categories: Political

Tags: ,

32 replies

  1. Wow, just wow! I had no idea that we (mostly myself, Kathy, and CW) were so disliked there – I guess you guys fooled us. Foolish me, I thought that we just had some differences of opinion and we could go our separate ways and remain civil to one another – apparently, that’s not possible. That’s too bad, I was under the mistaken impression that we had some “friends” there, I guess it was just a ruse too. Because of our difference of opinion on Donald Trump, we’re apparently now enemies – damn shame, it didn’t have to be that way.

    I’ve accepted that Ted Cruz (my favorite) isn’t going to be the Republican candidate – my life goes on – and I’ve accepted that Trump is the Republican nominee. I still don’t like him, but It is what it is. As I’ve stated many times in my posts, I do expect to vote for Trump as I believe that he will be immeasurably better than Hillary. So, all of that talk from you guys is pure smoke-blowing, you know as well as I that none of our authors is likely to vote for Hillary, most will do as I will and that is hold my nose and vote for Trump. He has some redeeming qualities whereas Hillary has NONE.

    As I noted in another post, if you want to comment here, even if you disagree with us, please do. If, however, you come here simply to berate, I’ll delete your comment(s) and block your IP.

    “Can’t we all just get along?”

    Liked by 1 person

  2. This is an open reply to the folks from that “other site” who have decided to complain about OUR 1st Amendment rights to speak our minds.

    Why, I wonder, do you feel that it’s necessary for a “drive by” attack on CW and Kathy (and me) for our feelings about Trump? Are you “butt-hurt” that we just don’t like Donald Trump? Apparently so. But, you doth protest too much. We really haven’t posted much about Trump in the last several months. Yes, there is a statement here and there reiterating our concern about his qualifications and that’s not gonna change, he still stinks, but we’ve published precious few postings about him – check it out. He won. We understand and accept that, but we don’t have to like it.

    If you’d bother to have checked out our posts over the recent months, you’d see that we have posted much more derogatory stuff about Hillary than about Trump – on that one subject, we agree, we don’t want Hillary either.

    In fact, most of us (me included) have publically stated that we expect to vote for Trump – he IS the lesser of the two evils.

    In a multi-person, coordinated attack on CW, the way you guys (and gals) reacted, it looked much like the Clinton machine’s tactics – they respond hard and fast to any negative statements about Hillary, regardless of whether there’s any truth to them or not. Their strategy is to intimidate the “enemy” to stop the negative press about her. We’re not going to stop speaking our mind about Trump and/or his qualifications to be POTUS.

    Several of you have indicated that you don’t miss us and that your blog is better off without us – we’re SO happy for you. We haven’t attacked any of you personally at your site, why do you feel that it’s necessary to come here and attack us?

    Finally, if you want to come to Pesky Truth and post a constructive, on-topic comment (even if you disagree with us), feel free, however, any more of the personal attacks on any of us will get the comment(s) trashed and the commenter barred.

    It’s a shame that it had to come to this, but it is what it is.


    Liked by 1 person

  3. In the beginning, Trump’s candidacy was a laughable matter, while offering little meaningful policy substance. His rise in popularity was based on the momentary mood of the public – anger.

    The history of Trumpism has proven again and again that Trump never changes; it is those who get behind Trump who change, and traded principle for popularity.

    There is no need to document the long list of politicians, pundits, and party leaders who have already thrown conservatism under the bus for political expediency, and have no path back to genuine principle. We have done that to some degree since 1988, and it has cost us terribly. Now we are being asked (again) for the final sacrifice of conservatism on the altar of political power.

    Trump is already waffling about the wall and about the solution to the flood of illegal immigrants, so the hope that Trump’s populism would evolve into conservatism is a waste. Accepting conservatism’s decline and downfall means accepting the loss of the principles on which conservatism was built. It means embracing the notion that the Founding principles and those of limited government and market economics were not enduring nor worthy of sustaining.

    David Limbaugh said it for me – I was a vocal supporter of Ted Cruz’s and don’t slightly regret it, mainly because I believe that most politically related problems plaguing the nation stem from our abandonment of the Constitution and that the best remedy for them is to restore constitutional principles and advance policies based on them. I believe that authentic, constitutional conservatism has not been tried for far too long and that Cruz would have brought it, warts and all.

    Yeah, he lost. I get it and I’m over it. Will we help your golden boy win? Most probably, but ONLY because of the alternative. That doesn’t mean that he will govern in a conservative manner, nor does it mean I’m gleefully going to jump on the Trump train and be his next cheerleader, and I’m damned tired of the Trump lovers demanding that of us and assuming that we’re voting for Hillary. Stop judging us as immoral or sellouts. That’s presumptuous and self-congratulatory.

    Liked by 1 person

    • No one is asking anyone to “be his next cheerleader” — I’m not — though taking shots at his cheerleaders is pretty counter productive. I’m not that straw man demanding it either. // As to the substance of the article, I don’t think it is the greatest idea I ever heard. But I’m not going to attack it at six weeks to D-day.

      Liked by 2 people

    • >>”Trump never changes; it is those who get behind Trump who change…”

      >>”…we are being asked (again) for the final sacrifice of conservatism on the altar of political power.”

      Well said, Kathy. You have kids and so do I, as do the others who regularly blog here. Any suggestion that we would sacrifice their futures over simple hurt feelings or pride is the lowest of insults, which I don’t think any of us deserve.


  4. What’s worse, I really doubt that the Democrats will let Republicans pivot more to the Left than their position. So not only is this a bad move, it probably will not work at all. It is like making a deal with the Devil and once you start doing it, it may be hard to stop. I look forward to hearing the new D position that will cost us 10 trillion dollars, because you know it will be “Free”.


    • Absolutely right, Patrick. When a person isn’t hindered by any conviction that says it’s wrong to use the strong arm of the government to take from one person and give to another, you never know what’s coming next.

      Thanks for stopping by, and I found your posts comparing Trump and Huey Long to be very interesting. I must confess that about all I knew about Huey Long before that was his name.


  5. I absolutely agree with Hardnox. Y’all are squabbling like little children, trying to pick up a turd by the clean end, while the Left continues to push forward. Donald isn’t perfect, who is? Cruz? Nope. A globalist, as is his wife who sat her ass on another elite globalist, Bush 43’s one world board to unite CAN/US/MX into a European-style bloc. Working out well for the EU huh? Now I’ve included the link if any of y’all have the guts to check it out.

    Cruz lost, get over it. You DO NOT win a war, and folks we’re in one, by throwing down your rifle when the going gets tough. You win a war by degrees and we’re about 50 YEARS behind the Left so now is not the time to screw around, whining about this or that. Now is the time to unite, WIN the WH, KEEP the Congress, and THEN work on weeding out the RINOs and CINOs like McLame, McConnell, Lyin Ryan, Murkowski, Don Young (we’re working on that in AK), and then plan for the future. We’re up against it folks and we’re taking incoming from all around the dial, i.e., Obama, Colon Powell, The Bushes, Clintons, Liberal Media, and the 47%ers. This election is a win or lose for all of the marbles, bet on it.

    Ask yourselves if Trump DOES get stuff done, i.e., build a wall, deport illegals by denying them jobs and welfare, rebuild the military, and defuse the globalists saber-rattling with Russia, etc. I would prefer a trade competition vice Americans at war AGAIN. Enough is enough. If he brings jobs back and turns the economy around will you still bitch and moan?

    If the half-steppers and foot draggers like Snowe, Collings, Yebbie Bushie and the rest of the whiners F it up and Killary Benghazi Clinton and her rapist husband get back in the WH and drag this country into Obama v3 THEY/YOU will be to blame. Every day that you look in the mirror, YOU will know it in your heart that you caused it all. You will own it, lock, stock, and corrupt ass barrel. Is that your goal? If so, continue to march, you’re in lockstep with the Left. If not, do some soul searching and like the Colonel said in FMJ, “Why don’t you jump on the team and come on in for the big win?”

    In closing, NO ONE here is a bigger proponent of the US Constitution than I am. I’ve shed blood, sweat, and tears to defend and uphold it and it has cost me a lot but it was worth it. NO ONE here is a bigger Conservative than I am, being told on more than one occasion (including from a close friend of Sen Jesse Helms!) that I am further to the Right than Attila the Hun (a compliment to be sure) but I support Trump, warts and all. Why? To return this nation to greatness we need to WIN and win big (to cover the Dem’s dead vote) and we have to continue to win to roll back the Progressive/Globalist bullshit that has been inflicted on us since Wilson!

    “A long journey begins with the first step.” Chinese proverb.

    PS: I put my money where my mouth is, with a total of $500 bucks sent to Trump.

    Liked by 3 people

    • You are perhaps the biggest surprise and disappointment of them all, Gunny. You can talk all you want about being the staunchest conservative and supporter of the Constitution but your actions speak louder to me than your words.

      I notice that neither you nor Hardnox bothered to address the subject of this post. What do you have to say about the fact that the guy you’ve chosen to “roll back” progressivism is proposing more progressivism? That he’s taking a page from democrats’ playbook and buying the women’s vote with our money? That he just provided yet another financial incentive for illegals to come and stay? Nothing. He gets a pass.

      I honestly don’t give a rat’s behind about what you think any more.


      • “I honestly don’t give a rat’s behind about what you think any more.”

        Wow, I’ll go off and have a good cry about that.

        If memory serves me (and it does) in 1986, Ronaldus Magnus signed a tax bill that allowed for inflation in regards to the deduction for exemptions for dependents. Is that Progressivism or simply ensuring that the Middle Class gets a break? IMHO, Trump is simply trying to help the Americans who work and to get more Americans to work. That is simply smart business and can only help to grow the economy.

        I hate to break it to you but Cruz is not a Conservative and I note that YOU FAILED to respond to what I posted about Heidi Cruz working for Bush 43 (A progressive globalist) on the CFR panel to turn North America into an “EU” style bloc. Cruz is a good man but he’d never win the general election and y’all need to face that fact.

        CW, you wrote: “That he just provided yet another financial incentive for illegals to come and stay?” Where is the proof of that? Trump builds the wall, makes it impossible for illegals to get a job, denies them freebies, and they’ll self-deport. Boot out the others who don’t go so your statement is wrong. Your statement is like the Left’s (and RINOs) claim about Mexico not paying for the wall. Not true. Mexico gets about 600B from us and turning off that tap and using the funds to build the wall makes Mexico pay for it.

        I draw your attention to the foreign aid chart that shows what the USA spends on foreign aid every year. Now imagine that tap turned off and diverted to rebuilding the infrastructure of the US, of which I would point out that the Middle Class is a significant part of.

        In closing, just remember that every time you slam Trump you’re helping Hillary out and THAT, CW, is on you and your kind.

        Liked by 3 people

      • I know that to some people calling Reagan’s conservatism into question is blasphemy. I’m not one of those people.

        That post, BTW, was VERY well-received by the very same bloggers at H&F who are criticizing me now. I think RR was, in principle, opposed to big government, and strove to minimize tax burdens in pursuit of that principle. Trump has demonstrated no principled stance against big government and is obviously trying to buy votes with a new entitlement in pursuit of that objective. A true conservative would call him out on it even if he still supported him. We’re supposed to learn from mistakes that advance progressivism, not use them as an excuse.

        As for Cruz, he certainly had your support at one time:

        Posted on March 10, 2014 by Gunny G

        Posted on March 12, 2014 by Gunny G

        Posted on March 27, 2014 by Gunny G

        Posted on April 12, 2014 by Gunny G

        Posted on January 3, 2016 by Gunny G

        Posted on February 1, 2016 by Gunny G

        Funny how he didn’t become an S.O.B. (to borrow Hardnox’s term) until after everyone decided that the momentum was with Trump.

        >> CW, you wrote: “That he just provided yet another financial incentive for illegals to come and stay?” Where is the proof of that? Trump builds the wall, makes it impossible for illegals to get a job, denies them freebies, and they’ll self-deport.”

        The proof is in the known fact that socialist policies attract unwanted immigration. Pull your head out of the sand and see what’s happening around the world.

        I’m all for reducing foreign aid and, where needed, rebuilding infrastructure. I don’t know what that has to do with my criticism of Trump for his socialist proposals.

        >>”In closing, just remember that every time you slam Trump you’re helping Hillary out and THAT, CW, is on you and your kind.”

        No, sorry. If the truth about your candidate hurts him, that’s on you and your kind.


  6. CW,
    If you are going to quote me, start at the top. Don’t cherry-pick, and read the comments.

    I see you all are still alive and existing in your echo chamber where no one reads your drivel. Good for you. You all seem happy.

    For months, I used to miss you all very much but I’ve gotten over it. I also see none of you have changed. You are all still stuck on hating Trump. It’s a free country.

    Trump is a lot of things but he’s not Hillary. To that end, unlike you and your fellow whiners, we at N&F exert our energies dragging Trump over the finish line while exposing Hillary for the evil beast she is with the hope we make some converts along the way. Unlike you and your fellow travelers, we are Never-Hillary first and foremost.

    Cruz lost get over it. Cruz dropped out in March. It’s September 14 for crying out loud. Your butt-hurt hate is getting the better of you. I thought you all adults.

    As you all know, and seemingly dismiss, is that I, unlike you all, campaigned for Cruz for SEVEN long months in THREE COUNTIES last year. What I discovered was that NO ONE LIKES THE SOB for a host of reasons. WTF did you guys do except bang on your keyboards?

    Back to the subject… I noticed while perusing your posts that you’ve not bothered to attack Hillary but you spend most of your time attacking the candidate that the people chose who is now the nominee. Sure Trump has warts. No one is excusing those. We’ll address them later because we have no choice right now. Trump is our candidate. Our focus at N&F is to bash Hillary and be cheerleaders for Trump until November 8.

    Btw, since you whiners left ‘Nox and Friends our subscriptions went from about 100 to over 1500+ at present count, and daily views are at 30,000 – 40,000 per day…. in other words, no one wanted to read your vitriol… and it’s blatantly obvious that our readers are glad you quit. (For the record, Crawfish was fired for attacking an 8 tour decorated combat vet after repeated warnings. The rest of you bailed on your own accord despite the lies you have told on this blog.)

    It’s pretty clear from our readership that you are in a minority. You can shove your snarky and dishonest remarks about our crew (I noticed those too), and spare me your pious conservatism. You don’t own the franchise on conservatism. The world we live in and the world we would all like are two different things right now. Like all of you, we want a return to the Constitution and we will not abandon that fight but first we need to banish the left FIRST. You can’t win a war by thinking you can rush to the last battle.

    Lastly, you are either with us or against us. If we lose this election, game over.

    Thanks for reading ‘Nox and Friends.

    Stop by anytime.

    Liked by 3 people

    • First, let me beg Garnet’s forgiveness for inviting this fight to his site. I know that’s the last thing he wanted.

      As far as my “cherry-picking,” I won’t pay homage to your habit of speaking out of both sides of your mouth by informing readers that you were against what Trump said before you were for it. Nothing else you said changes the fact that you rationalize for Trump what you would have loudly denounced had it been proposed by a democrat.

      I know that you and other Trump fans (I see Gunny did the same thing) like to attribute my problems with Trump to my “hating” him or my being “butt-hurt” because Ted Cruz lost, while continually ignoring every valid criticism. Your weak, straw-man arguments certainly make it easy for you to avoid any real discussion about who and what Trump is. Believe me, I would prefer nothing better than to spend my blog time criticizing Hillary and was looking forward to it, but the Trump people who forced him down our throats have robbed me of that joy because now there is no bright alternative to point to.

      I’m a little tired of hearing about how much harder you worked on behalf of Cruz. When the going got tough, you bailed, and if your wabbling on the blog is any example of your “support,” it’s no wonder you didn’t have better luck.

      >>“Sure Trump has warts. No one is excusing those.”

      Except you

      >>“no one wanted to read your vitriol”

      Apparently speaking the truth now amounts to “vitriol.”

      >>”It’s pretty clear from our readership that you are in a minority.”

      Yes, I’m sure Trump supporters are happy to find a site where no ugly truths are allowed. Congratulations on being in the majority, since that is apparently what you value above all else.

      >>”…spare me your pious conservatism…”


      “…we want a return to the Constitution…”

      And so you thought you’d go with the guy who shows no interest in it. Good idea.

      “…we need to banish the left FIRST.”

      There is no “we” any more, and the notion that you will “banish” the Left by electing Donald Trump is laughable.

      “…you are either with us or against us.”

      Whether I ultimately vote for Trump or not, I am against those who forced him upon us and always will be.

      >>“Thanks for reading ‘Nox and Friends.”

      You’re welcome. Thanks for reading The Pesky Truth. (I will probably be fired after this).

      Liked by 1 person

    • I agree with HN and GA. add me to the [long] list. If I had the money, I’d seriously love to buy you all a ticket on the next cruise with Bill Kristol and company, where you could plot your future moves. After I and others have already been called barnyard animals, I imagine that trip could really get those creative juices flowing.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Consider yourself added to the ignoble list, Bullright. I’ll also add you to the list of those who came to express your anger with me but couldn’t find the courage to address the subject matter of this post.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Au contraire, but I did address your subject matter… to bash Trump supporters.

        I’ve written on Reagan’s pro-family platform before. No need to expound where not warranted or welcomed. The economic issue another factor. Nothing new. But you don’t address the subject of the vitriol.

        Liked by 2 people

      • PS: I do give you the credit for linking when you’re attacking someone — unlike Garnet who opts for drive-by smears.

        Liked by 1 person

      • >>”…. you don’t address the subject of the vitriol.”

        If it’s vitriolic to call a rationalization a “rationalization,” then I plead guilty. Should I take a look at your site and see if there’s been any vitriol there? Because I’m sure, since it bothers you soooo much, you’ve stood up and taken your fellow bloggers to task. And not engaged in any vitriol yourself, of course.

        Is it sufficiently addressed for you now?

        Liked by 1 person

      • CW, Bull is too much of a gentleman to use vitriol on his blog. He has never squandered his blog time demanding someone vote for Trump. You can try to make a straw man of him like you folks did me, but it doesn’t fit, nor does it work.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Hopefully Bull is also too much of a gentleman to call me out for “vitriol” while he silently lets much worse go unchallenged elsewhere. I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt.

        As for me making a “staw man” of you (or Bull), I honestly don’t know what you mean. I have not made up any phony arguments about anyone, unlike those who have claimed that my problem with Donald Trump is a matter of hurt feelings.


      • I call it as I see it and reserve the right to choose my arguments. So many to choose from. The straw man was to Kathy but it applies to lots that has been said about ‘Trumpers’. But you could check my blog if you want. It’s not p/c. I’m far less worried about being offended than survival.

        Liked by 1 person

      • “Hopefully Bull is also too much of a gentleman to call me out for “vitriol” while he silently lets much worse go unchallenged elsewhere. I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt”

        … “while he silently lets much worse go unchallenged elsewhere”?

        I didn’t’ know that it was a “duty” to call someone out at any time at any place. We do have the right to remain silent if we wish. We have the right to choose not to jump into someone else’s debate or argument. We do have the right to let something go unchallenged if we wish. That is called freedom to speak or not to speak.

        Liked by 1 person

      • >>” I didn’t’ know that it was a “duty” to call someone out at any time at any place.”

        It is if you want to come here and claim that you have a problem with “vitriol.” To make an issue of “vitriol” here while ignoring it elsewhere would make Bullright a hypocrite, right? I’m pretty sure Bullright wouldn’t want to be a hypocrite.

        >>”We do have the right to remain silent if we wish. We have the right to choose not to jump into someone else’s debate or argument. We do have the right to let something go unchallenged if we wish. That is called freedom to speak or not to speak.”

        Yes, Peppermint, I wholeheartedly support your right to remain silent and not jump into someone else’s argument, and I encourage you to exercise that right immediately.


      • Bullright:

        I respect a person for picking their battles; but I call it as I see it too, and someone who criticizes one person for “vitriol” while looking the other way and keeping his mouth shut when his friends are vitriolic is nothing but a hypocrite.


      • CW, I chose to come here and enter the discussion. I will leave now by my choice, not yours.

        BTW, I love your sense of humor: “Yes, Peppermint, I wholeheartedly support your right to remain silent and not jump into someone else’s argument, and I encourage you to exercise that right immediately.” Absolutely hilarious. You tell me to leave when you can no longer win the argument.

        Liked by 1 person

  7. Okay, got a better idea? What we have now sure isn’t working. Kill the unnecessary government stuff, that by itself would probably pay for it. If not, let’s quit giving money and food to illegals and send them back. Money left over.


    • There’s that hell-with-the-Constitution mentality I love so much. As long as it’s “paid for,” who cares if it’s right or wrong? You must be a Trump fan.

      It’s kind of ironic that your comment is to stop giving the illegals stuff when Trump is handing out free daycare. Who do you think will be the beneficiary of that plan???

      So to answer your question: YES I have a better idea. Get the government OUT of the business of being everyone’s nanny. When you finally do that, the free market and life’s natural consequences will take care of the rest.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Wetzel, you answered your own question – “kill the unnecessary government stuff.’ That happens to include daycare.


  8. Wow is right, CW. It didn’t take long for the Trump lovers to put the justification spin on a liberal-like idea, did it?

    Let’s also ask him how he plans to force employers to pay maternity leave when that’s supposed to be up to their discretion? But then I guess we’ll be paying that too.

    For someone who’s claimed he isn’t a politician and won’t govern like one, Trump is sure copying their playbook with that smart brain of his.


  9. Well, let’s face it, this is just one more redistribution of wealth scheme – only this time, coming from someone disguised as a Republican. Of course, you’re 100% right, he is buying votes, pure and simple. And this is only childcare. I can’t wait to see how he’s planning to replace Obamacare, it’ll no doubt be along the same lines – a lot of smoke and mirrors behind which is the government taking from productive citizens and giving to nonproductive ones (under the guise of “fairness” and “compassion”).

    We have apparently lost the ability to think logically. If you can’t afford children, don’t have any – there are numerous ways to avoid getting pregnant these days, many of which are even subsidized by us, the taxpayers. It’s no different than why we aren’t all driving a Bentley, if we can’t afford it, we don’t buy it.

    The problem is that we no longer have a family structure where the dad worked and the mom took care of the children. Single moms and absent dads are the problem. A lack of education leading to a decent job is another. Both of those things are results of our permissive society who, starting in the 60’s, decided that the old family model was obsolete and the new structure allowed unlimited freedom to have as many kids as the government will support and there was no need for a father in the household. Those things are lies, and we’re just now paying the price for accepting them.


    • Great comment, Garnet.

      Yes, Democrats sowed the seeds for these problems back in the 60’s when they began the campaign of destroying the traditional family. We now have an enormous number of single-parent families, many of whom make up the low-income population that can’t afford the high cost of daycare. This was folly that would have naturally corrected itself if Republicans had refused to join forces with Democrats to protect people from their own bad decisions, “for the sake of the children.”

      You’re right, Republicans don’t think logically anymore. That’s what happens when you get caught in the self-defeating cycle of trying to treat the symptoms of liberalism rather than attacking the root cause.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: