The New York Times editorial board has stated that the Republican tax bill will have the following effects.
It will: (1) add more than a trillion dollars to the federal debt in 10 years, leaving future generations to pay the tab; (2) transfer money from current and future poor and middle-class Americans to corporations and the very wealthy; (3) create new incentives for businesses to move production off-shore, increasing the trade deficit and hurting factory workers; (4) increase economic growth by only 3/10th of a percent by 2027, as it will not encourage businesses to invest, hire more people and give workers raises; and (5) drive up interest rates and the value of the dollar, making our exports less attractive and imports cheaper for our consumers, thereby creating layoffs of still more factory workers.
The vast majority of serious economists believe that this bill will bring nothing but bad news.
Let's hope that it never becomes law.
Stain of corruption
At some point -- and I think it is like pornography -- you know it when you see it: the lies, the support of a child molester, the favoring the rich and the near constant Russian associations begin to taint people who call themselves Republicans.
We do become much like the people we associate with. We do take on their characteristics and belief structure. We do take on their values.
If you hang around with people who hate blacks, Mexicans, Muslims, etc., you must adopt those same beliefs to stay in the group.
What beliefs must you now adopt to call yourself a Republican?
You can say you value integrity but you support a president who lies daily.
You say you value fairness but support congressmen who will steal from you and give your taxes to the rich.
You say you value decency but support a political party that supports an accused child molester and a president who has bragged about dominating women.
At what point do you become one of them? At what point can you no longer say, "I support them but don't support what they do"?
At what point does the stain of corruption, lies and indecency soak in so far you can't wash it off?
Personally, I think that time has come and those who call themselves Republicans and stand by, silently, daily soak up the stain of the current president and GOP congressmen.
Mature should decide
A recent letter quotes three prominent men who agree that older men start wars, but younger men fight and die in those wars.
That's the way it has been for all time.
A middle-aged nut case named Kim Jong Un in North Korea wants to use atomic bombs on the United States. I think he wants to be proactive and hit us before we hit him.
Hitler used blitzkrieg to run over countries before they knew he was coming. It made sense because the one who hits first usually wins. If Kim hits our heavy-population areas first, the "young" will be taken out and we couldn't fight to protect our shores.
Take a look at the destruction we did in bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Those who were outside and exposed to the extreme heat of the bombs were instantly turned into piles of black ashes. Others died by fire or from radiation exposure.
I want to die of natural causes and be buried in U.S. soil, not blown away by our Texas wind.
I want mature men and women to decide the fate of this nation.
As Gen. Patton once said, the young will be called on to kill more of them than they do of us.
On Nov 29, the DRC published a letter to the editor that reported only one woman present on the 10-member Confederate monument committee.
Also noted, that while women constitute 50 percent of the population, they are being robbed of this important and unique female perspective.
In reply, is the committee about style or substance?
How is the mission of the committee fulfilled by injecting gender into a matter that falls chiefly along racial lines? Does gender alone merit as a qualification or are citizens best served with knowledgeable members in the subject matter instead?
The same edition announced a search for five additional women to serve.
If diversity is the key to the committee's success, should steps be taken to ensure racial/ethnic representations including Asians, blacks, Hispanics, Native Americans and whites?
As a moral issue, should Catholics, Protestants, evangelicals, Jews, Hindus and Buddhists be present?
Since diverse sexual orientations surely existed during the Confederate monument's installation, should there be a proportional presence of heterosexual, homosexual and transgender appointees?
Surely each of these communities has important and unique perspectives, too.
Perhaps in the future, pre-selection committees will be convened to determine quotas that insure politically correct configurations, thoroughly invested with its imputed moral authority and its results pregnant with the spirit of the zeitgeist (times).