Election 2012


In case you haven’t figured it out yet, I loathe Donald Trump and don’t want the man to be President. I’m in the process of publishing a list of 2016 reasons to oppose him. Trump’s followers have a tendency to ask for reasons why people don’t like them and they tend to dismiss them as having no basis in reality. They even suggest that Mr. Trump has been misunderstood by the media and by people who’ve watched his speeches live. This list will hopefully show that Donald Trump has been advocating for some pretty awful stuff throughout his career as a real-estate-developer-turned-reality-television-star-turned-presidential-candidate. His “gaffes” aren’t new, nor is his bigotry. And alleging a 43 year campaign by the media to smear him and ruin his chance at becoming President is a big clue that he is the one who is saying things that are not based in reality. 132. Opposed to a living wage, then for it, then opposed to it… I don’t even know if Trump knows how he feels about raising the minimum wage at this point. He can’t keep his story straight if asked twice within a twenty-four-to-forty-eight hour period. I wonder if he contemplates raising the minimum wage while sitting on his gold throne. 133. Blamed concept of climate change on China. He now claims his 2012 tweet about China creating a climate change hoax was a joke. You know, like his hacking joke and his “blood coming out of her whatever” joke. It’s a good thing that Donald didn’t go into stand-up comedy because his comedy career would deplete the world of its tomatoes. Anyway, the supposed joke is something that he’s referenced repeatedly, even before he joked about it. If it’s really a “joke”, and “it isn’t, then even he doesn’t get it. 134. Taxing Chinese exports. He wants to put a forty-five percent tariff on Chinese exports. In other news, the zombie form of George III is planning on suing Donald Trump for using his shtick of supporting outrageously high taxes. 135. His claim of beating China in trade deals. He backed it up by saying that he owns part of a Bank of American building that he got from China in a war. Actually, it was a result of a relationship between Hong Kong billionaires and Trump after they helped rescue him from having to file another bankruptcy on a property; when the property was sold without his support, Trump waged a legal battle with them. That chunk of the bank building he bragged about getting was something he had to settle for after he lost the legal battle. 136. Said US leaders would invite El Chapo to become a citizen. Someone in his family or his campaign needs to take his Twitter account away from him. 137. Calls himself the least racist. Considering his lack of understanding of how even the simplest things work, it’s unsurprising that he considers himself to not be a racist. 138. Bragged about a former employee calling him the least sexist boss she’d ever had. Apparently, he didn’t realize that she didn’t say that he wasn’t sexist, just that he was the least sexist. 139. Stacie J. While Trump wants to capitalize on his fame from The Apprentice in this election, it’s important to remember every single time he did something flat-out-wrong on that show. Case in point, his treatment of Stacie J. Other competitors portrayed her as mentally ill because she consulted a Magic 8-Ball toy before her team did their tasks. He called her a “loose cannon” and fired her, violating the Americans with Disability Act of 1990. He fired her simply for behaving in a way that was perceived as being due to mental illness. 140. Trump stigmatizing the mentally ill. This is a continuation of the Stacie J situation. Because of Stacie’s quirky behavior he said, “This comes from two people, Stacie, that don’t like each other at all. The first thing they’ve agreed on is that you’re crazy…Stacie, if you have a problem, I don’t want you running my companies.” This suggests that Trump refuses to hire or continue to employ mentally ill people. This is backed up by his use of ableist terms like “nut job”, “crazy” and “wacko” to demean Jeb Bush, Bernie Sanders, Lindsey Graham, Ted Cruz, Ben Carson, and Elizabeth Warren. He conflates mental illness with crime and said that gun-free zones that gun-free zones are “target practice for the sickos and for the mentally ill.” A man who willingly tears down the mentally ill should not be in charge of a country where 25% of the population is believed to have a mental illness; and at least two-thirds are either unaware of it or are going untreated for it. 141. Painted himself as the hero of NYC in New York Times article in 1983. According to Trump, he alone is responsible for Grand Central being renovated and hotel jobs being saved. 142. Doesn’t like compromise. He told Life magazine in January 1989, “I’m not big on compromise. I understand compromise. Sometimes compromise is the right answer, but oftentimes compromise is the equivalent of defeat, and I don’t like being defeated.” 143. He suggested success/deal-making is genetic; that people who don’t succeed are afraid to or are “life’s losers”. In 1984, he told Lois Romano of the Washington Post, “Some people have an ability to negotiate. It’s an art you’re basically born with. You either have it or you don’t.” In The Art of the Deal, Trump said, “Most people think small, because most people are afraid of success, afraid of making decisions, afraid of winning.” He also said, “One of the problems when you become successful is that jealousy and envy inevitably follow. There are people—I categorize them as life’s losers—who get their sense of accomplishment and achievement from trying to stop others. As far as I’m concerned, if they had any real ability they wouldn’t be fighting me, they’d be doing something constructive themselves.” 144. […]

2016 Reasons to Oppose Trump: Reasons #132-158


I don’t like Mitt Romney. I can’t say that I always disliked him, because for a while, I thought he was a pretty good guy. At the beginning of 2008, if you had told me that he would eventually end up facing off against Barack Obama, I would have said Romney would get my vote. I liked him more than Obama at that point. But I’ve learned more about both of them since then. Mitt Romney is untrustworthy. It isn’t just due to his waffling on issues. He is an untrustworthy man. Former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman was on his 2008 campaign and quit that campaign due to issues with Romney. This is a man whose family had been close friends with the Romney family for the better part of the last 150 or so years. If a family can have that long of a relationship with someone, but realize (after a few months of campaigning) that you don’t trust the guy to be President, then why should I, as a complete stranger, trust him? One issue that Romney has had different positions on is abortion. He’s one of those politicians who doesn’t believe that churches should provide birth control or morning-after pills. (In 2002, he was for morning-after pills/emergency contraceptives and endorsed legalization of RU-486.) He is open that he would appoint judges that share his (current) pro-life position. In 1994, he supported abortion rights, but was personally against it. His mind was apparently changed because of cloning, which seems weird to me. (Cloning and abortion aren’t exactly things that go hand in hand.) He would also be delighted to sign a federal ban on all abortion. He is also opposed to stem-cell research. He views it as breaching an ethical boundary, though he thought it was okay in 2004 if it was privately funded and was okay in 2007 if it was just from surplus embryos. He views the goals of the research to not be worth the means used. To me, it’s difficult to like a man opposed to stem cell research when his wife could very well die of a disease that could be helped by that research. Mitt claims to be a friend to women, but his “binders full of women” didn’t help him pick many female judges while he was Governor of Massachusetts. And for a friend to the vagina-possessing, he made it a point to say that women need more flexible work schedules because his chief of staff said, “I can’t be here until 7 or 8 o’clock at night. I need to be able to get home at 5 o’clock so I can be there for making dinner for my kids and being with them when they get home from school.” While that might sound nice to some, it is ridiculous to justify a point by using a comment that a woman has to be at home to cook and to be with their kids after school. Husbands could be at home cooking or with their kids. His comment not only makes me think of the idea that some men just want women in the kitchen, it makes me think of men who don’t know that they too can parent their kids. For a man who thinks that children deserve two parents, he doesn’t seem to ever admit that men should actually take part in the parenting and not push it all on the women. He also seemed to imply that the culture of violence that exists in America is more from single parents and that we should tell people that before they have kids, they ought to think about getting married. Having a single parent doesn’t mean that a child will be violent and having two parents doesn’t mean a child will grow up a pacifist. A lot of very violent people have had both parents together. A lot of very peaceable individuals have only had one parent. Mitt Romney urged a single mother, who had taken care of Romney’s kids, in 1983 to put her second child up for adoption once it was born. He said that it was what the LDS Church wanted and that the church encourages adoptions where “a successful marriage is unlikely.” When the mother said she would never surrender her child, she claims that Romney threatened her with excommunication. While he was Bishop, he refused to believe that there were cases of physical or sexual abuse of women in his stake, even though there was evidence that pointed to it. He also forcibly counseled a woman in her forties, who had four teenage children, and had developed medical complications (a potentially dangerous blood clot) against aborting her pregnancy. She had already been approved to have an abortion by the Stake President (higher up than a Bishop), but Romney went to the hospital and counseled against it. The woman said that Romney told her that as her bishop, “my concern is with the child.” She wrote in an unsigned essay, “Here I—a baptized, endowed, dedicated worker, and tithe-payer in the church—lay helpless, hurt, and frightened, trying to maintain my psychological equilibrium, and his concern was for the eight-week possibility in my uterus—not for me.” She went further: The woman told Romney, she wrote, that her stake president, a doctor, had already told her, “Of course, you should have this abortion and then recover from the blood clot and take care of the healthy children you already have.” Romney, she said, fired back, “I don’t believe you. He wouldn’t say that. I’m going to call him.” And then he left. The woman said that she went on to have the abortion and never regretted it. “What I do feel bad about,” she wrote, “is that at a time when I would have appreciated nurturing and support from spiritual leaders and friends, I got judgment, criticism, prejudicial advice, and rejection.” Mitt wants everything but marriage for gay couples, which is the same as someone saying that they want […]

Why I Wouldn’t Vote For: Mitt Romney



Oh, Newt, how do I loathe thee? Let me count the ways. I could say it is because you are a big schmuck and just leave it at that. That would be true, but it wouldn’t be worthy of a blog entry.  I could also say that I have disliked you for so long (since I was around 10 years old) that it is just impossible to start liking you, but that wouldn’t be completely true.  People could change, but I don’t know that you are capable of any kind of meaningful chance.  Honestly, when I look at you, I think of a a conservative Dennis the Menace or, possibly, a robot; and I just don’t like robots.  But these are not the reasons that I will not vote for you.  No, the reasons are numerous and varied, and might contribute to some people think that this whole post is just too long to read. Though I don’t want to judge the private lives of others, Newt Gingrich is one that begs to be judged. I don’t particularly like the idea of divorces, and that is probably one of the only things that people might think me as conservative on. (Actually, my issue with divorces is when people don’t take their marriages seriously, so it isn’t really a conservative thing as much as a frustration at folks thing, but I digress.) First, he marries and (eventually) divorces one of his former high school teachers, which I could almost forgive him for, as those types of relationships are often (on some level) a form of authoratative abuse—especially when they start (like his did) by secretive dating. Now, I might have let it slide because of the circumstances related to the start of the marriage, but because he chose to leave his wife while she was being treated for cancer makes this personal decision of his a very disgusting decision. It is even more disgusting, if the allegations by Jackie Battley are to be believed, that he wanted to discuss the terms of her divorce while she was recovering from having surgery (her third related to uterine cancer) to remove a (benign) uterine tumor. Even more disgusting was that he refused to pay alimony and child-support while marrying Marianne Ginther, whom he’d been having an affair with. I have a hard time forgiving any person who cheats on their sick spouse. Adultery is bad enough, but to do it when a spouse is sick is just, in my mind, unforgivable. Of course, his morally-deficient personal decisions don’t stop with his dumping of a wife with cancer for a younger, prettier version that he’d already proposed to during his first marriage. No, Newt was so into family values that he chose to browbeat Bill Clinton for his cheating ways, even though he had cheated on his first wife and was cheating (again) with who would become his next wife. And when he left Marianne for Callista Bisek Gingrich, it was a surprise to Marianne. Not only did he file for divorce from Marianne, he asked the Catholic Archdiocese of Atlanta for an annulment based on the fact that Marianne was previously married. He not only chose to divorce her, but to say that their marriage never existed. That alone would be proof of his lack of a conscience, but he left her eight months after she was diagnosed with Multiple Sclerosis. As is true with many chronic illnesses, the symptoms of and problems related to Multiple Sclerosis get worse with stress. It is important for people who have Multiple Sclerosis (or cancer) to stay as relaxed as possible to keep their diseases from worsening. It shouldn’t have surprised Marianne that Newt would do this to her, since it was virtually the same thing that he had done with Jackie. It also shouldn’t surprise her that he has never expressed regrets or apologized to her for the choice to leave her or cheat on her, since it looks like Mr. Gingrich has no moral compass. So, why do these immoral decisions impact why I wouldn’t vote for Gingrich? Well, it’s a couple of things. In general, people who divorce their chronically ill spouse end up not only dissolving a marriage, but stripping a person of income, health insurance, and a good enough support system. Usually, the divorces come about because of the stress of caring for a disabled spouse or stress over the family’s finances. As the former probably isn’t true since, at least in Marianne’s case, the chronic illness was a relatively new diagnosis and the latter is likely not the case for Newt Gingrich because of his financial status, then it makes it seem like he doesn’t want to take care of someone in need. That is not a personality trait that should be admired or coddled in a politician. It is bad enough when politicians lose their moral compass because they are bought and paid for by corporations, but when they have no moral compass to begin with, it makes me wonder what kind of decisions they might make when given a great deal of power and authority. Another reason that I would not vote for him based on this issue alone is that if he abandons someone when things are stressful, then will he be able to handle one of the most stressful jobs in the world? What will he do when he has to make a decision and someone’s life is on the line? Will he be able to make it or will he just go find something easier to do? Now, I shall devote my anti-Gingrich opinion to the typical issues that impact many voters on their way to the polls. First of all, Newt Gingrich is, against federal funding “abortion providers” which is a fun and inflammatory way of saying that he doesn’t like Planned Parenthood. Despite the fact that he knows that it is already illegal for organizations like Planned Parenthood to use federal money for abortions, he still […]

Why I Wouldn’t Vote For: Newt Gingrich


Okay, so I’m continuing in my “series” of why I wouldn’t vote for certain politicians. And I think that I’m going to go with Rick Santorum for this post, so this should be fun. (There are so many more of these that are possible.) First of all, every time I see Santorum on CNN or the nightly news, I get sick to my stomach. He always manages to say something that pisses me off or grosses me out. Though that happens sometimes with other politicians, it seems to occur every single time with Santorum. Rick Santorum is one of those people who just doesn’t seem to understand what is going on in the world. He seems like has no grasp of reality. For example, Santorum told the mother of a cancer survivor, “Insurance works when people who are higher risk end up having to pay more, as they should. In your case, your son obviously did nothing wrong. Obviously there are a lot of other people that increased their health risk that did do things wrong and as a result, it resulted in higher health care costs.” This comment came after she asked why Santorum supported insurance companies who refuse to insure people who have pre-existing conditions and/or who charge more for people who are sick. He had previously said, when talking about having to get health insurance for his family (after he quit his job to run for President), “We have a child who has a pre-existing condition and we went out and we said, we like this plan…we have to pay more because she has a pre-existing condition. Well, we should pay more. She’s going to be very expensive to the insurance company and, you know, that cost is passed along to us…I’m okay with that.” Santorum doesn’t seem to understand the reality of being sick, nor does he understand the reality of being poor and sick. While there are some people who are sick who play a part in causing their illness, the majority of people who are sick didn’t ask to be that way. (From my experience, the belief that the sick cause their own problems is the opinion of someone who is either in denial, uninformed, or just an ignorant asshole.) Struggling families can’t pay for simple things like check-ups, yet if they are truly sick, he wants them to pay higher prices than healthy people. On what planet and in what universe does that make sense? How is it good or fair or just or, hell, even Christian to force the sick and the poor to cover that kind of cost? And what if they figure out that they can’t cover it at all? Itisn’t right to keep any of them from having affordable insurance because they happened to have health problems. What would his opinion be on this whole thing if he wasn’t wealthy enough to take care of his daughter’s medical bills? Would he still say that if he were struggling to make ends meet and was faced with the possibility of not being able to cover the bills, which might result in his daughter’s health being put in jeopardy? Would he still claim that mandates for affordable coverage were destroying most of the countries in the world if he needed that afforable coverage? Well, given the source, he probably would, even though it isn’t actually true. Santorum is so out-of-the-loop when it comes to health care that he claimes that the pre-existing conditions clause in the Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare) would increase health care costs because people would wait until their sick to purchase coverage. This has actually been shown to be incorrect in the Massachusetts health care law (sometimes called RomneyCare) that the federal law is most like, where younger, healthier people are encouraged to purchase coverage before they get sick, which keeps costs lower, and has the costs of the sick being paid for by the premiums of the healthy. Of course, like many in his party, he supports medical liability reform, which is also commonly called tort reform. It is simple to say that “frivolous lawsuits” cost Americans lots and lots of money, but the call for tort reform is not a good one. Decisions made by doctors have life and death consequences for patients. A lawsuit against a doctor who has committed a grievous act of malpractice is not a frivolous suit. It is a civil liberty guaranteed to Americans under the U.S. Constitution. It holds doctors accountable for the decisions they make, and encourages doctors, insurance companies, etc. to give the best care to patients that is possible. If you haven’t seen the documentary Hot Coffee, you should watch it and pay close attention to the story of Colin Gourley. If anyone is the poster child of how medical liability/tort reform has gravely impacted the lives of victims of bad medicine, it is Colin Gourley. I cannot immagine a person supporting that kind of reform after hearing Colin’s story. Santorum seems to view himself as the savior of not just the country, but the world. On his own page, he paints himself as basically an All-American superhero. He claims to have been one of the first people in the country that knew that Syria was a threat. For the record, though he may have played a part in writing certain legislation regarding Syria, Santorum was not the first national leader to understand that there were some serious issues with the Syrian government. Relations with that government have been on shaky ground off-and-on since the 1950’s. Syria has been on the United States’ list of state sponsors of terrorism since the list was first made in 1979. In 1986, the United States withdrew its ambassador over evidence that Syria was involved in an attempt to blow up an Israeli airplane. Syria played nice and expelled some organizations leading to the countries started acting more diplomatic towards one another. Rick Santorum wasn’t born when the first issues between […]

Why I Wouldn’t Vote For: Rick Santorum