► Show Top 10 Hot Links

Archive for the ‘government’ Category

Mars Attacks: Here are the Results of Government Run Healthcare

by Mars ( 72 Comments › )
Filed under Blogmocracy, Communism, Crime, DHS, Education, Europe, Fascism, Free Speech, government, Guest Post, Health Care, Healthcare, Liberal Fascism, Politics, Socialism, UK at March 9th, 2016 - 6:00 am

http://www.buzzfeed.com/patricksmith/make-room-for-matthew#.nxE62kKQq

Buzzfeed is usually reliably liberal, but this article is a huge wake-up call to those who say we must have the government involved in healthcare. Warning to all who have autistic relatives like I do, this article is your worst nightmares come true. We must use our brains this election or our future is Englands present. Unfortunately the solution reached in this article is “more government”, England is doomed. Handing more power to the people who caused the problem in the first place is just asking for more problems.

This Is How An Autistic Child Is Being Kept In “Prison” Under The Mental Health Act

Matthew Garnett, 15, who is autistic and has learning disabilities, has been detained in a psychiatric intensive-care unit for the last six months against his family’s wishes. BuzzFeed News investigates why he and children like him end up stuck in a system they can’t control.
posted on Mar. 4, 2016, at 8:24 a.m.
Patrick Smith

Robin Garnett still has the bite marks from when his son attacked him. On 4 September last year, Matthew, 15, became upset then punched and head-butted his dad and said he wanted to kill him. When the police arrived they found Robin with blood dripping from various wounds. They handcuffed Matthew, who is autistic and has learning disabilities, and took him to hospital.

Matthew’s family agreed with the police and doctors that he should be detained under the Mental Health Act while appropriate treatment for him could be found.

But the mental scars of what happened next will take a lot longer to heal. Since that day, his family say, he has been kept “in prison” against their wishes.
The Garnett family

Friday marks six months since the day Matthew was taken to a psychiatric intensive care unit (PICU) – essentially the mental health equivalent of an accident and emergency department – in Woking, Surrey, up to two hours’ drive away from the Garnett family home in south London.

Robin and Isabelle, Matthew’s mum, were told he would be in Woking for six to eight weeks at the most while a suitable clinical placement within the NHS could be found. He’s been there ever since, and hasn’t received the treatment he needs or been properly assessed, the family say.

After the Garnetts launched a Change.org petition that’s now been signed by over 140,000 people and Matthew’s plight was brought up in parliament, NHS England confirmed to BuzzFeed News on Friday that he will be offered a place at a specialist hospital in Northampton “in a matter of weeks”, albeit on a date yet to be decided.

Robin told BuzzFeed News the Northampton offer sounded positive but said the family are “cautious” due to their level of trust in the system being so low. “We’ve heard it all before, but I hope this time it’s different,” he said. “Even if that is the case, there’s a long way to go and there are a lot of other Matthews out there.”
Change.org

The Department of Health told BuzzFeed News it was looking into the matter “urgently”.

Despite signs of progress in Matthew’s campaign, questions remain over how and why he was placed in the facility for so long. His parents say he regressed while in the PICU and needs urgent treatment for neurological changes that are taking place.

The family’s petition has joined a growing chorus of charities and campaigners calling on the government and the NHS to do more to stop autistic children and children with learning disabilities getting stuck in a bureaucratic limbo that takes them away from their family and restricts access to treatment.

Matthew’s case has drawn attention to the many other children who have been detained under the Mental Health Act in temporary assessment centres for years due to what campaigners call an unacceptable flaw in the way mental health services are commissioned in the UK. Some 3,500 people with learning disabilities, including 165 children, are currently occupying inpatient beds rather than living in their communities, according to the 2015 Learning Disability Census. However, the number of those who are stuck in assessment centres is simply unknown.

So how does a child with a serious mental illness end up detained in a temporary facility for months or even years and denied the treatment and care they clearly need?
The Garnett family

At first the Garnetts could understand why Matthew was sectioned: He needed help, he needed assessing and treating. Plus they had little choice – it wasn’t the first time Matthew had become violent at home, the family were concerned about the wellbeing of Matthew’s younger sister, and the only other option was for him to be arrested by police.

Matthew’s situation was made more serious by the way his condition has developed in the last few years. Once a bright, chatty boy who loved music and swimming, his IQ has fallen to 55, having been as high as 88 at the age of 7. His family think the onset of puberty has something to do with it, but say there is “something big” happening that’s not being properly monitored.

His family describe him as a 5-year-old in a young adult’s body, and despite the challenges they’ve faced, his dad said he is still an “absolute joy” to be around.

Robin showed BuzzFeed News a video of his son on Father’s Day in which Matthew spontaneously improvises a song. “You’re the best daddy in the world, Daddy,” he sings.
The Garnett family

Sat in the kitchen of the family home, Robin said: “He’s nearly my height [6’3”], he’s a hulking 15-year-old, but he’s a child inside. By that point [4 September] there were seven security people marching him to this thing and he was this lost boy who wasn’t any danger to anyone.

“He’d done a thing that was very violent and that triggered various protocols. It’s basically like putting a confused 5-year-old in prison for six months and expecting him to be fine.

“We had a child who was trying to kill us. In his own words, he was trying to kill us. So we agreed at that point but on the understanding that he was going to this place in the short term as a stepping-stone to the assessment and treatment that everyone is agreed he needs.

“He was not a well child then – he’s an even less well child now. We thought this would be a few days before he was taken to a new place.”

However, Matthew has regressed in the PICU and needs urgent assessment and treatment that the centre simply can’t provide, his family say. He has autistic catatonia, meaning he is at times withdrawn and silent. He is confused and unsure what is happening and when he will come home. He has asked more than once whether he is in prison.

His head has been shaved because he was tearing his hair out, and he suffered a compound fracture in his wrist after a scuffle with another inpatient in the PICU. Matthew’s family say he wasn’t being supported in turn-taking while playing on the Nintendo Wii and was pushed over by a bigger boy. Staff only took him to A&E after 24 hours, the Garnetts say.

Matthew, who also has ADHD, has been given family-size bottles of Coke at night and does little other than play on the Wii, his family say.

“The least well-equipped person in the world to deal with this sort of uncertainty is a child with autism,” said Robin. “He looks to us for certainty and we can’t give him any.”

Robin asked what the outcry would be if someone with a physical health emergency was treated the same way: “Can you imagine them saying ‘you’ve got a broken leg but we won’t get round to it for six months’?”
The Garnett family

Isabelle, Matthew’s mum, is angry, upset, and frustrated. “What crime do you have to commit to be detained for six months?” she said. “What crime? It would appear that you can be detained indefinitely if you have autism. And it stinks.” The family say the whole episode is affecting their own health.

Shortly after Christmas, Isabelle had planned to take Matthew to the cinema. She’d made a lot of phone calls and followed the lengthy protocol that such an off-site trip involves. Yet when she arrived to collect him, a member of staff had booked him a hospital appointment instead. No one had explained the change of plan to Matthew.

“He was in fight-or-flight then,” she said. “He was so agitated that the minute he saw me he attacked me.”

Despite hardly recognising the previously animated and talkative boy she once knew, Isabelle said doctors in the centre have told her: “Oh he’s fine, he’s really bouncy.” This is because his ADHD is going untreated, she said.

One doctor told the family that it costs as much as £1,000 a day to keep Matthew in the PICU, a figure the NHS would neither confirm nor deny when BuzzFeed News asked.

Cygnet Healthcare, which runs the facility in Woking as well as centres in 18 other locations across the country, declined to comment on any specific details related to Matthew’s detention, but said in a statement:

“We support some very vulnerable people to whom we have a duty of care, a key part of which is respecting patients’ confidentiality. Therefore, it would not be appropriate for us to comment on an individual case.

“Our primary purpose is to assist individuals with crisis support, stabilising them ahead of admission to a clinical mental health treatment and support service. Where a placement at a specialist service is not immediately available, a clinical decision is taken which may decide the most appropriate alternative is for the individual to remain in our care until a space does become available.”

In a Care Quality Commission report based on an inspection in February 2015, the Woking centre was found to have failed in four areas, including not having staff “who are properly qualified and able to do their job” and not providing “safe and appropriate care that meets [patients’] needs and supports their rights”.

In the 14 months to 31 December, Cygnet made £118 million in revenue and £31.6 million in pre-tax profits.
The Garnett family

Beyond this family’s personal trauma, Matthew’s story shows the labyrinthine ways NHS services are commissioned and how families can be left confused and concerned.
The Garnett family

Matthew is due to be headed to St Andrew’s hospital in Northampton in a few weeks. The place would have been available sooner if it weren’t for five young inpatients there who have been waiting for a care package to be offered to them in the communities they come from.

Three of those five turned 18 while at St Andrews, meaning they graduated from the child and adolescent mental health services and now face a whole new layer of bureaucracy from the adult services. This is the NHS mental health commissioning merry-go-round.

NHS England confirmed to us that it pays for Matthew’s treatment, not his local NHS trust. Critics say this funding arrangement could be bringing perverse incentives into play where a person is detained even though they could be supported back home in their community.

Tom Purser, community campaigns manager at the National Autistic Society (NAS), told BuzzFeed News that Matthew’s case, and those of the five who were waiting to leave Northampton, highlights a commissioning system that doesn’t serve people with specific mental health needs.

“It could suggest that the local commissioners are happy to leave people in places where they are being supported being paid for out of a completely separate budget,” he said, “and it means they don’t have to worry about putting a package together which will either come from local NHS or local authority budgets.

“This is slightly speculative, but there is no great incentive for local commissioners to bring people back into their communities, because they will require extensive packages to arrange.

“And these things can take a long time to arrange and can be very difficult when you have someone with very specialist needs.”

Purser said the NAS is calling for a full review of the way mental health services are commissioned in the UK in regards to autistic children.

South London and Maudsley NHS Trust said in a statement that it was working with the Garnett family on this case, adding: “There are only a limited number of units in England that can address this young person’s complex needs. These units are not best placed geographically for this family and young person.”

A spokesperson for NHS England told BuzzFeed News: “We have every sympathy for Matthew and his family and we understand that this has been a very difficult time. It has been confirmed that Matthew will be moved to St Andrew’s, where he will be able to receive the specialist care that he needs. We anticipate that this will happen in a matter of weeks but cannot confirm an admission date at this point.”

It turns out six months is not even that long when it comes to children being detained in assessment centres.

Josh Wills, who is severely autistic, was 12 when he was admitted to hospital in his native Cornwall because he was hitting himself so hard he lost a third of his tongue.

There was no treatment and assessment centre available in Cornwall, so he was taken to one in Birmingham. He was there for three years and released at the end of 2015, aged 15.

“We decided we needed some help,” his dad, Phill Wills, told BuzzFeed News. “He was 11 when he really started injuring himself.

“It was during the Olympics, I was with friends watching Usain Bolt doing the 100-metre sprint and my phone went and it was Josh’s mum saying he was in hospital. That was the last time that he stayed in any of our houses.

“He was three months in the hospital in Cornwall. His behaviour was classed as life-threatening and he was only 12. He had some surgery, he lost one-third of his tongue, he lost most of his lip, he had a hole in his cheek, all through what he was doing to himself. Sometimes I wouldn’t have been able to pick him out of a lineup.”

Wills was told Josh would only be there for 12 weeks. But that became six months, then a year. Wills and Josh’s mum drove more than 200,000 miles over the course of his detention.

Like Matthew Garnett’s parents, Wills agreed to his son’s sectioning at first as the only available option, but then became frustrated with the lack of movement and action in finding him a placement in his home county.

And like the Garnetts, Wills started campaigning with a petition on Change.org, which ended up getting 250,000 signatures. That got the story air time on BBC News at Six and BBC News at Ten, as well as This Morning. The then care minister, Norman Lamb, intervened and eventually Josh was offered a residential place with two full-time carers in Cornwall, 12 miles from his family home.

“It was the petition that turned it all around for us,” said Wills. “It went live on 26 March 2014, which was 18 months into his Birmingham stay. We just didn’t feel that we and Josh were being listened to. If you don’t listen to the parents of Josh and Matthew, you’re not listening to the children.

“We never expected to go as public as we did. I didn’t expect to be getting hugs from Holly Willoughby.

“No one should have to shout as loud as we did, just to be heard. I don’t blame anyone locally really. Norman Lamb did everything he could and it still took a long time for the wheels to start turning.

“I hope to god that Matthew’s case moves faster than ours did.”
Phill Wills

But what can be done to make sure this kind of thing doesn’t happen again?

Charlotte Haworth Hird, an associate at law firm Bindmans who has advised on a range of mental health cases, including ones related to detention, said detention under the Mental Health Act “trumps” all other rights that a person might have. Essentially, as long as physicians agree that someone is at risk to themselves or others, they can be detained on an ongoing basis.

The key to stopping children like Matthew being detained for such lengthy periods, she told BuzzFeed News, is intervention in the community to stop young people falling into crisis.

“Children in cases like this end up being detained in the same way anyone gets detained – there can often a crisis point,” she said. “But one of the concerns, and this is often the experience of families, is that crisis point only arrives because of a lack of support being provided in the community.

“So it’s necessary to look further back to see if detention can be prevented by better community support from the local NHS trust or social services. My experience from working with families is that if you look at the bigger picture there are points at which there could have been proper intervention, so it never needed to get to the point where someone goes to hospital.”

Last month a report from Sir Stephen Bubb, chief executive of charity leaders’ body ACEVO, into the Winterbourne View scandal in 2011 – when undercover journalists documented systemic abuse at a home for people with learning disabilities – recommended that a commissioner be appointed to promote the rights of people with learning disabilities and their families.

Bubb said the 3,500 people with learning disabilities in inpatient care was an underestimate and called for more to be done. NHS England noted in response to that report that “no one should try and defend the indefensible when it comes to outmoded patterns of institutionalisation”.

Jan Tregelles, CEO of Mencap, the learning disabilities charity, and Viv Cooper, CEO of the Challenging Behaviour Foundation, said in a joint statement to BuzzFeed News:

“People with a learning disability and their families have endured five years of failure by national and local government and the NHS to bring about meaningful change for the 3,500 people confined to inpatient units in England.

“Despite promises to move people out of inpatient units and ensure they get the right support in their local communities, many people are still stuck in these units, where they are at increased risk of abuse and neglect and often unacceptably far from loved ones. Perhaps most shocking is the fact that 165 of these people are children under the age of 18.”

“The latest NHS England’s commitment to close inpatient beds over the next three years will only be credible if it actually leads to change on the ground for people with a learning disability. Hospitals are not homes. Families need to see the right support developed in their local communities. This means the right housing, staff with the right skills and with the right expertise, who can support individuals, families and care providers.”

The Department of Health said in a statement: “It’s crucial children with mental illness get the right care in the right place – change is already underway to make that happen. We are investing £1.4 billion into young people’s mental health and are working with local areas to improve services so young people get better quality, preventative mental health care as quickly as possible.”
Patrick Smith is a senior reporter for BuzzFeed News and is based in London.
Contact Patrick Smith at patrick.smith@buzzfeed.com.

Is There An Ike? Would He Be Needed Now?

by coldwarrior ( 67 Comments › )
Filed under Cold War, government, History, Open thread, Politics, World War II at October 12th, 2015 - 7:00 am

I ran across this interesting essay about the Eisenhower years.The author does get it right, Ike succeeded because of calmness in leadership and crisis that was forged in WW1 and WW2. I would even argue that giving the command to go ahead with D-Day changed his brain chemistry. THE ENTIRE WORLD hanged in the balance…ALL OF IT. I dare say not since battles of Salamis and Plataea (1) has an order been that important. Not since Themistocles has the weight of civilization rested so squarely on one man’s shoulders. Ike certainly might have felt the weight of the ostracons that were cast toward Themistocles in his own time!

That single D-Day order and the responsibility that goes along with it tempered his decision process and risk assessment to a degree that we mere mortals can never hope to come close to understand. If anything, it made him more like Master Yoda than like Chuck Norris. Chuck takes no offense at this as they are both ancient Jedi Masters. Ike’s calmness and judgement in the face of chaos, danger, and the cacophony of the nattering classes is certainly something to be studied, sadly, I think America is too politicized for it to be applied for the time being.

That said, I can’t seem to find an Ike in the current batch of candidates; or, as the classic line from The Dubliner’s song ‘Molly Maguires’ :’ you’ll never see the like of (him) again’. The world is not on the verge of WW3. Two massive and undefeatable Armies are not standing toe to toe on a trip-line in Europe. Would Ike be needed now? Or is someone like him only needed once in a century or ten to bring wisdom to leadership for a brief time? Could he even get elected now?

Eisenhower’s Timeless Virtues
When Dwight Eisenhower was first mentioned as a possible candidate for president in 1948, House Speaker Sam Rayburn offered a pithy assessment: “Good man but wrong business.” Today it’s clear that few of the White House’s occupants have been more right for the job.

Eisenhower was the last president born in the 19th century — 125 years ago this week. He governed during the 1950s, a decade that now seems hopelessly anachronistic. But our experience since then illuminates virtues he had that have grown more valuable as they have become rarer.

In office, he was disparaged on both the left and the right. Conservative pundit William F. Buckley said Ike was “undaunted by principle, unchained by any coherent ideas as to the nature of man and society.” To Democrats, he was the antithesis of Adlai Stevenson, whom they regarded as “the voice of a reasonable, civilized, elevated America,” in the words of liberal historian Arthur Schlesinger.

What looked like defects then look better now. He ended one war, in Korea, and began no new ones. He balanced the federal budget three times and reduced the federal debt as a share of gross domestic product. He cut spending in inflation-adjusted dollars. He steered his party away from McCarthyism.

Inspiring speeches were not his thing. His supporters said “I like Ike,” not “I revere Ike.” Unlike Theodore Roosevelt, he resisted using the presidency as a “bully pulpit.” He lacked the grand ambitions of Franklin Roosevelt.

Critics who saw him as a do-nothing despaired at his popularity with the American people. Richard Strout wrote in The New Republic, “The less he does the more they love him.” A public with fresh memories of the Great Depression and World War II wanted tranquility, not transformation.

Eisenhower wasn’t averse to action when it was required. But he showed a keen appreciation of limits — the limits of military power, the federal government’s competence and the role of the president.

He had a sense of perspective rooted in the perils he had overcome as supreme commander of Allied forces in Europe during World War II. When he traveled to give the commencement address in 1954 at Penn State University, where his brother was president, downpours forced the huge event indoors. Milton apologized, but Ike smiled and said he hadn’t worried about rain since it threatened to impede the Normandy invasion.

He would not be spooked into rash decisions. When France was losing a war in Vietnam, he declined to send U.S. forces to help an ally — and he quashed a proposal by the Joint Chiefs of Staff to use nuclear weapons. “You boys must be crazy,” was his reply.

When the Soviets sent troops to crush an uprising in Hungary in 1956, some conservatives wanted action to roll back the communist empire. Eisenhower sent a letter asking the Soviets to withdraw. They didn’t.

While championing NATO as a bulwark against Moscow, he pushed for the rearmament of West Germany to reduce the American load. He warned against excessive arms spending promoted by the “military-industrial complex.”

On the occasions that he took regrettable steps abroad, he at least minimized risks to Americans. After unfriendly governments gained power in Iran and Guatemala, he used covert action by the CIA, not military invasions, to overthrow them.

No one would argue that Eisenhower, who advised blacks to practice “patience and forbearance,” did enough for racial equality. But he ended segregation in Veterans Administration hospitals and in schools on military bases. He pushed through the first civil rights act since Reconstruction.

When the governor of Arkansas defied a court order to admit blacks to a public school in Little Rock, Ike sent the 101st Airborne Division to enforce it — provoking opposition from, among others, Sen. John F. Kennedy.

In 1956, Eisenhower won 39 percent of the black vote, the most any Republican had achieved since 1932. Eight years later, Republican nominee Barry Goldwater got just 6 percent of the black vote. In 2012, Mitt Romney got less. That is just one measure of how today’s Republican Party would be unrecognizable to Eisenhower.

He was one of our best presidents because of his seasoned judgment and steady calm during a period more turbulent than we often remember. Too bad that among the people now vying to win the presidency, in either party, there is no one like Ike.

(1) For more detail, please see: Herodotus (c.484 – 425 BC), The Histories, books VII and VIII in particular.

Time to Cut Govt

by coldwarrior ( 44 Comments › )
Filed under Economy, government, Open thread, Politics, taxation at September 9th, 2015 - 7:00 am
By Terence P. Jeffrey | September 8, 2015 | 11:14 AM EDT

(CNSNews.com) – Those employed by government in the United States in August of this year outnumbered those employed in the manufacturing sector by almost 1.8 to 1, according to data published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

There were 21,995,000 employed by federal, state and local government in the United States in August, according to BLS. By contrast, there were only 12,329,000 employed in the manufacturing sector.

The BLS has published seasonally-adjusted month-by-month employment numbers for both government and manufacturing going back to 1939. In the first 50 years of the 76-year span since then, manufacturing out-employed government. But in August 1989, government overtook manufacturing as a U.S. employer.

That month, government employed 17,989,000 and manufacturing employed 17,964,000.

Since then, government employment has increased 4,006,000 and manufacturing employment has declined 5,635,000.

According to the BLS data, seasonally-adjusted manufacturing employment in the United States peaked in June 1979, when it hit 19,553,000. Seasonally-adjusted government employment peaked in May 2010, when it hit 22,996,000.

(However, government employment in May and June of 2010 was unusually high because of temporary workers hired to help conduct the decennial census. In April 2010, there were 22,569,000 government employees in the United States. That climbed to the peak of 22,996,000 in May 2010, then dropped to 22,740,000 in June, and returned to 22,659,000 in July 2010.)

There were more Americans employed in manufacturing in 1941 in the months leading up to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor than are employed in manufacturing in the United States today, according to data published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

This August, according to BLS’s seasonally adjusted data, there were 12,329,000 employed by the manufacturing sector in the United States. But back in August 1941, there were 12,532,000 employed by the manufacturing sector. By December 1941, the month of the Pearl Harbor attack, employment in the U.S. manufacturing sector had risen to 12,876,000.

The 12,532,000 employed in manufacturing in August 1941 equaled 1 manufacturing worker for each 10.6 people in the overall population (which the Census Bureau estimated at  133,402,471 in July 1941). The 12,329,000 employed in manufacturing in August 2015 equaled 1 manufacturing worker for each 26.1 people in the overall population (which the Census Bureau estimated at 321,191,461 in July 2015).

The 4,821,000 people employed by government in August 1941 equaled 1 for each 27.7 people in the overall population of 133,402,471. The 21,995,000 employed by government in August 2015 equaled 1 for each 14.6 people in the overall population of 321,191,461.

Of the 21,995,000 employed by government in August, 2,738,000 worked for the federal government (including 596,500 who worked for the Postal Service), 5,092,000 worked for state governments, and 14,165,000 worked for local governments.

State and local government employees include large numbers of people employed in education. Of the 5,092,000 who worked for state governments in August, 2,446,300 (or 48 percent) worked in education. Of the 14,165,000 who worked for local governments, 7,852,500 (or 55.4 percent) worked in education.

I’m Confused.

by coldwarrior ( 184 Comments › )
Filed under Barry Goldwater, Donald Trump, Economy, Elections 2016, government, immigration, Military, Open thread, Patriotism, Politics, The Political Right at August 31st, 2015 - 7:00 am

I actively read all of the negative punditry from the ‘righty’ chattering class and statements made by our ‘righty’ politicians, and I have noticed two negative themes that they use against Trump and his supporters. I find these very sly and interesting, and I find these suppositions to be very incorrect and frankly insulting:

1: Free trade is a pillar of conservatism. Is it? Since when? Since when is it even remotely conservative to willingly look the other way while your trade partners cheat and send good middle class jobs out of the country forever? Since when is it conservative to actively regulate to run billion dollar account deficits? For that matter, since when is it conservative to massively expand government and run up debt that equals 100% of gdp? Since when is it conservative to agree to regulations and policies that keep wages stagnant for almost 30 years?

The GOP needs to jettison the so called Chamber of Commerce, a once truly capitalist group, but now a group that fights for more regulation and immigration / free trade treaty crutches instead of doing the real capitalism of hard work and innovation and productivity. Lowering wages only goes so far, sending jobs overseas only goes so far then the system comes unglued at home becasue short term gain costs in the long run. Their talking points will risk losing the newly won middle class. Free trade is not a pillar of conservatism. Fair trade is. When we compete, we win.

I wonder what would happen if the University of Dehli set up a Law School and H1B’s became available to the new grads? I wonder what would happen if we outsourced the chattering class?

2: Nationalism is a bad thing and never a conservative position. Really? Since when  it it not conservative to put America’s interests first ahead of the other countries and groups in the world? Since when is it conservative to be in never ending wars to ‘spread democracy’ where we send the middle class kids off to die while the political and chattering class kids go to university? Since when is it not conservative to enforce the laws and control the border? Why is it not conservative to be a nationalist?

 

How the HELL did we get to the point where putting America’s interests first became a bad thing?

 

Tho GOP and the chattering classes are reaping what they sewed. And it would be very nice to see them ‘unemployed’.

 

*A word from Dorian on the same subject*