Category Archives: Editorials

016 – Dodging a nuclear bullet – one madman takes on another (An editorial)

Almost astonishingly lost in all of the follow-up to the violence in Charlottesville, and the totally clueless response of the bigot-in-chief, was the status of the crisis with North Korea.  Really, how ridiculously astounding is that?  The world is pushed to the brink of a nuclear war and the following week no less, that does not even merit a blip on the news radar.

There can be no question that it has been a very good thing to see Kim Jong Un backed off (perhaps temporarily, but at least for now) on his nuclear threats.  The world lucked out … on this occasion.  The important thing now will be to recognize this narrow escape for just exactly what it is … and not to let it somehow lend any type of credibility to the human abomination who still holds the office of President.

For one moment, consider what transpired in order to make this happen.  Trump was more than willing, almost giddy, to threaten North Korea and thereby to clearly risk the deaths of up to 60 million people or more, including hundreds of thousands of Americans.  Why would he be willing to do that?

  • Because he is such a master strategist?  Hardly.
  • Because he was absolutely sure that Kim would blink?  No way.

The clear answer to that question is that he weighed the benefits to Donald Trump personally and decided that risking millions of lives (not his own, of course) was completely outweighed by the potential political and personal benefit he thought he could achieve by the perception that it was he alone who was willing to call Kim Jong Un’s bluff.

Thank God that this appears to have turned out well for now, but if there ever was a situation where the right thing happened for absolutely the wrong reasons, then this was it.

Here is what Senator Lindsay Graham said in the lead up to all of this …

016 - Dodging a nuclear bullet - Lindsays comment.jpg

I absolutely believe those were Trump’s words, and his feelings.  Since he felt there was no real risk to the continental United States, he had no reservation whatsoever in playing world-class Russian Roulette with all those other lives.  By the way, it was indeed “millions” of lives at risk to die – not just thousands.

His base will no doubt predictably tout this as an “I told you so” moment.  “See, we were right all along about him.”  I would expect nothing less from them.

But to everyone else who is not completely invested in finding any way at all to justify their vote for Trump, this should not  be considered a triumph in any way, shape or form.  More than that, it is yet just the latest proof (or it was the latest until this past week) of just how irrational and totally self-centered this man really is.

Republicans have been shown on many occasions that Trump has only one guiding principle – what is best for Trump.  They have seen time and again that loyalty is an absolute one way street with him.  Cross him, in his mind, even just once and he will throw you under the bus quicker than you can say Kim Jong Un, or General Pershing.

Well, all of humanity was just given that same stark lesson.  Trump was blithely willing to throw millions of people under the bus, but this time … this time … it miraculously turned out OK.

The question must be, how long will we allow this man to be in the position to be able to make that type of decision ever again?

016 - Doging a nuclear bullet - scent of incompetence


015 – What makes me think a movie is bad? (Oh my God – A non-political editorial!)

What?  A Pearl editorial and it has nothing to do with politics?  Actually, come to think of it, the subject of this post can only very loosely be categorized as an “editorial”.  But hey, it’s my blog, and I’ll categorize it as I see fit … so there!

In my most recent movie review post, regarding Valerian, I very clearly indicated my displeasure with that movie, even going so far as to give it a place in my all-time non-Top 10 list.  I think that I provided a number of somewhat coherent explanations as to why I was so dissatisfied with that movie.

But it also got me to thinking.  Just what precisely does or does not a movie need to do in order to incur my reviewing wrath?  When I first started writing reviews, and emailing them to friends and family years ago, I was sometimes asked if I had ever thought of trying to write movie reviews avocationally, if not professionally.  My internal answer to that question usually involved my feeling that I just felt hard-wired, it seemed, and predisposed to like at least something about almost any movie I would see.  I never felt like that was a very good starting point for a career as a professional movie critic.

In addition to that feeling, if I ever did review professionally, I would likely see many more movies, and certainly many of those would not be movies that I likely would have chosen to see if left on my own.  Whenever I have gone to see a movie to date, it has almost always been because I felt that there was at least something that attracted me to it.

So what are some of those terrible movies that I have seen in the past?  Given my age, I will have to go back quite a few years for most of them, so some of you may well not be familiar with them

Billy Jack.  This was the original movie with Billy Jack in the title which was released in 1971.  However, this was not the first movie that contained the character of Billy Jack.  That distinction belongs to the 1967 movie Born Losers.

  • Billy Jack, as with most if not all of the movies in the series, was co-written, directed and starred in by Tom Loughlin. For those of you, who don’t know who Tom Loughlin was, basically think of Chuck Norris before Chuck Norris… WAY before Chuck Norris.  Heck, Billy Jack was even before Bruce Lee.

015 - Billy Jack.jpg

  • Billy Jack was a Navajo Indian badass, Green Beret Vietnam War veteran and martial arts expert who came home to right the wrongs perpetrated upon the Native Americans he grew up with. The movies dealt with Billy Jack coming home and kicking ass, going to trial because he kicked ass, and then later even being elected to Congress!
  • Here’s a TV reference for you with a link back to Billy Jack. Remember the TV series The Incredible Hulk, starring Bill Bixby?  In the opening credits, there was a scene where Dr. David Banner was speaking with the investigative reporter.  He tells him, “Mr. McGee, don’t make me angry.  You wouldn’t like me when I’m angry.”  I’ve often thought that was a bit of an homage to Billy Jack.  Often, before Billy Jack would kick ass, he would take off his signature hat, wipe his brow and with great exasperation say something like “You know I try, I really try to remain passive, and to control my violent temper.   But sometimes, sometimes … I just go berserk!”  at which point he definitely kicks some ass.

Here is a scene from Billy Jack where he goes berserk …


Here is David Banner warning Mr. McGee not to make him angry …

  • I clearly remember the first time that I saw the original Billy Jack. I was in the Air Force, stationed mainly in Washington DC in the early 1970’s.  It was a time where I was seeing LOTS of movies.  In fact, I kept track one year and my total for the year was well over 100 movies (which includes a number of movies I saw multiple times, such as Klute, which I will refer to again later in this post.
  • I remember feeling totally manipulated and almost dirty when I walked out of that theater. The movie shamelessly works the audience up into a lather with the gross caricatures created, and the humiliation foisted upon those poor Navajo kids.  Then in walks Billy Jack and you just can’t stand even having to wait at all for him to just make those bastards pay.
  • In addition to that, the movie was incredibly poorly acted. Loughlin’s actual wife, Delores Taylor, played his wife in this movie as well.  I’m sorry to say, but someone actually trying to act badly could not have done it more convincingly than Delores.


Walking Tall (1973).  This also was the original Walking Tall  with Joe Don Baker as Sherriff Buford Pusser (not  either of the remakes of this movie, by the same name, starring Bo Swenson in 1981 and starring The Rock in 2004).  (Geez, Dwayne Johnson has been making movies that long already?!)

  • Walking Tall told a supposedly true story which was very loosely based upon the real life Sherriff Pusser in Tennessee.  Think Billy Jack with a badge … eventually.  He comes home, also as a war veteran, to find his small hometown overrun by the scum boss of a local casino.  The casino is the centerpiece of gambling, drugs and prostitution that has made everyone in town afraid.

015 - Walking Tall

  • Not to worry because enter Buford Pusser who challenges the corrupt Sherriff after being acquitted of kicking ass at the casino, and becomes the new town Sherriff. After which he continues to kick ass again, and again.  In the original movie, Sherriff Pusser dies in the end in a mysterious single car crash as supposedly the real Sherriff Pusser died in real life.  I don’t remember exactly whether or not The Rock dies at the end of his remake.  I’m pretty sure he does not.  That wouldn’t be any way to treat The Rock, now would it?
  • This movie came out just the following year after Billy Jack and I probably had a hangover from my feelings about that movie. My reaction to Walking Tall  was very much the same as the reaction that I had to Billy Jack – I greatly resented having that same feeling of manipulation.


Fun with Dick and Jane (1977).  George Segal and Jane Fonda.

  • Once again, this is the original that was also, for some totally inexplicable reason, remade in 2005 starring Jim Carrey and Tea Leoni (of Madam Secretary).  I intensely disliked “Fun with Dick and Jane”, starring Jane Fonda and George Segal.   I’m pretty certain that I never saw the remake with Carrey and Leoni.
  • The advertising said “Bonnie and Clyde they ain’t”.  Damn right.  One of the things that made Bonnie and Clyde so successful is that Warren Beatty and Faye Dunaway actually made those despicable outlaws somewhat sympathetic, albeit with the great help of a script that often bore no resemblance to reality.  On the other hand, I had no sympathy, empathy or connection whatsoever to Jane and Dick.
  • I only saw it once, and it is hard to remember now so many years later just exactly why I disliked it so much.  But I think I just found the lead couple to be so extremely unlikeable that it overrode any other feelings I had about the movie.

015 - Fun with Dick and Jane.jpg

  • This was all in spite of my great admiration for the film career (at least most of her films) of Jane Fonda. For example, I saw, in theaters, her academy award winning performance in 1972’s Klute over 10 times.  I have even seen Klute  in a double feature (along with Summer of ’42) three times – once back to back on the same day.  That’s right.  I watched a double feature twice in one day.  I was in that theater in the tiny town of Milford Delaware back in 1972 for almost eight hours!  God knows how much popcorn and soda I consumed that day.  Now if that sounds really weird to you … I can hardly disagree


Bewitched  (2005) starring Will Ferrell and Nicole Kidman.

  • I enjoyed the TV show (though I much preferred the original Darrin Stephens, Dick York). I even sort of enjoy Will Ferrell normally (think strategery), though he can get on my nerves a lot of the time.  But this movie just left me totally cold.  I’ve only seen this movie once and my fading memory is that it was just totally stupid and not particularly well acted either.  But I remember clearly that I absolutely hated it.  Come to think of it, I actually may have walked out of this one.
  • I did note on at least this movie, that the majority of film critics and audience goers seem to agree with me. The movie received a 25%/28% rating on Rotten Tomatoes.

 015 - McClintoc-Bewitched-My Dinner with Andre.jpg

My Dinner with Andre (1981) starring character actors Wallace Shawn and Andre Gregory.

  • I know that I actually walked out of this movie. Why I even decided to see it in the first place is a complete mystery to this day.  Almost the entire damn film is two guys talking with each other in a Manhattan restaurant.  As I recall, I found both of them to be full of themselves, and about as intellectually annoying as you can possibly imagine.
  • Actually, there may have been at least one other movie that I walked out of, but I have been wracking my brain trying to remember it, with no success. If I think of it before posting this article, I will include that one in this list as well.


McClintock (1963) starring John Wayne and Maureen O’Hara.

  • John Wayne was not the best of actors. He was beloved by many, but certainly not because of his acting chops.  But that has nothing to do with why I dislike this movie so much.  My dislike stems from only one solitary scene, in which Wayne needlessly and inexplicably kills a man in cold blood literally without thinking.  It was so bizarre and corrupt, and also so out of character, not only for Wayne’s character in this movie, but for most all of his other movie personas as well.
  • That’s it.  I have virtually no other memories of this movie.  But my memory of that one scene is so vivid, and caused such a visceral reaction for me, that it alone has earned this movie a place in my all-time non-Top 10 list.
  • I do have one caveat to this review. I am not entirely  certain that this is the movie in which Wayne thoughtlessly murdered that guy.  I know it was John Wayne, and it was a western (pretty safe bet there), but it may have actually been one of his other westerns.  But I will never know because I am not about to go back and watch any of his western films ever again.

I only saw Fun with Dick and Jane, McClintock, Bewitched  and My Dinner with Andre once, which was more than enough.  Whereas I have subsequently seen Billy Jack and Walking Tall at least once more.  In Billy Jack’s case, I saw it the second time years later and appreciated it in my second viewing for more of its campy nature.  It was so bad it was actually kind of funny.  I seriously doubt, however, that Tom Coughlin (the writer, director and star of Billy Jack) made it with anything but the most serious of intentions.

Given how I have gone into quite a bit of detail about Billy Jack in this post, including the You Tube video, you can probably tell that my opinion of that movie has softened a bit over the years.  But I can never remember ever since leaving a theater with such a feeling of real anger that I felt back in 1972 when I first saw Billy Jack.  For that, it retains its place in my all-time non-Top 10 list.

After having said Valerian would now make my all-time non-Top 10, in trying to come up with that list for this post, I can’t even think of 10 movies that would qualify.  I have listed six here, in addition to Valerian.

It would be quite presumptuous of me to consider a movie “bad” simply because I was not interested in the subject matter.  Therefore, I do not do so.  I simply avoid seeing movies that have subjects that don’t interest me.  Once again, that would likely create an obstacle for me were I ever to consider trying to review professionally.

I can’t seem to come with up any particular common denominator which has caused me to dislike each of these particular movies so much, other than the obvious thematic similarity between Billy Jack  and Walking Tall.  I guess if I had to pick one common feeling, it would be the feeling of manipulation that dominated my reactions to at least three of these six, which includes Valerian.  As you can tell, I don’t like that feeling … at all.

014 – Alert! There has been a cojones sighting (albeit a fleeting one) in the Republican Senate. (An Editorial)

Some of you may have noticed that this is editorial #14, even though I only have written 12 previous editorials.  I skipped #13 because I didn’t want to take a chance on jinxing this editorial since I am finally able to be just a bit positive about a few Republicans.

Actually, the biggest cojones belong to a few Senators who only have figurative ones – Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski.  They are to be credited for their willingness to buck McConnell all along.  They deserve the lion’s share of the credit for being consistent and steadfast in their opposition to any of the lame repeal and replace attempts.  But this editorial is mostly a shout out to the maverick who finally not only spoke a good game but actually backed it up with some action – John McCain.

The final attempt (at least the final attempt on Thursday night) to repeal any or all of the Affordable Care Act failed thanks to the three Republican votes of Collins, Murkowski and McCain.  As they say Down Under, “Good on ya, mates.”

Now to be fair, McCain did vote “Yes” on the two other versions of repeal which were both voted down, but by larger margins, whereas Collins and Murkowski were consistently “No” all along.  Frankly, who knows why McCain decided to vote “No” on attempt #3.  Maybe it was because when it came right down to it, he just didn’t trust Paul Ryan not to simply have the House Republicans just simply rubber stamp the so-called Skinny Repeal without working on the further reconciliation that McCain demanded, and that many other Republicans simply hoped for.   What a concept.  He didn’t trust Paul Ryan.

Strange Bedfellows is a term that may aptly sum up the alliances that formed to eventually defeat attempts to repeal.

  • John McCain. Who would have thought that he might finally step up to the plate?  Maybe that brain surgery was more successful than anyone could have imagined.  Maybe all of the recent Sessions trashing had a little to do with this as well.  Just maybe McCain was thinking even a little bit about sticking it to old Donny on behalf of all those fellow prisoners who got captured.
  • Lindsay Graham. Regarding the repeal and replace votes, in spite of his rhetoric, he was party line all the way along, in every vote – not once voting “No”.  He often talked a good game but finally, when Trump began dissing his Senate buddy Jeff Sessions, he seems to have drawn a line that even he was not willing to cross.  In fact, many Republican Senators have come to Session’s defense at the expense of their previously deafening silence when it came to any of Trump’s abominations.

Graham seems to now have his feet planted firmly against Trump being able to fire Robert Mueller as well.  Again it’s the Strange Bedfellow analogy.  It’s not like Graham would otherwise probably put up much of a fight if Trump decided to fire Mueller.  But doing so now at the expense of Sessions?  Why old Lindsay won’t have any of that.  Nothing like doing the right thing for the wrong reason.

  • Speaking of Jefferson Beauregard Sessions, I have absolutely no love lost for him. He is quite possibly the worst possible Attorney General that Trump could have nominated, which is saying something when other possibilities like Rudy Giuliani and Chris Christie existed.

To see and hear Trump trash Sessions so completely, and with such ridiculous logic ,,, well it couldn’t happen to a nicer guy.  That said, if this is what it took to finally drive at least a little wedge into Trump’s blind Republican support, then more power to it.

  • The Freedom Caucus and particularly Rand Paul. Talk about a monumentally Strange Bedfellow.  The only reason Paul and his gang gave McConnell so much trouble early on was because they didn’t think the repeal efforts were mean enough!  But once again, let’s hear it for doing the right thing for, in their case, absolutely the wrong reasons.

There is an axiom that many outside the United States attribute to us.  “The United States can almost always be counted upon to do the right thing … after they have tried just about everything else.”

In the Republican’s case, I would slightly alter that.  “The Republicans can be counted upon to do the right thing … only when nothing else has worked that has been solely in their own self-interest.”

It is possible, regarding healthcare at least, that the point has now been reached.

For whatever the reasons, the results are what I think the vast majority of the country wanted – to put an end, for now, to this repeal nonsense.  Instead of just looking for anything that the Republicans, and Trump, could call a “win”, regardless of how mean and destructive their legislation was, now hopefully, just hopefully, both Republicans and Democrats can search for legislation that will be a “win” for the American public.



012 – He badly wants to fire Mueller … and Republicans may just let him (An Editorial)

If you can’t see this coming, you just aren’t looking hard enough.  Oh Hell, you’re just not looking at all.  If the things we’ve heard and seen over the past year and a half have taught us anything, it should be that the arrogant egotist that occupies the Oval Office will do or say anything.

012 - Trump Collage.jpg

In a perfect world, you would like to think that there is a John Dean lying in the weeds somewhere who, in order to save his own skin or maybe even, God forbid, to just do the right thing, will be finally willing to turn on the Prevaricator in Chief.  But for all the similarities to Watergate, there is a big difference now.  Any potential new John Dean knows that no matter how convincing and verifiable his tale, he will be vilified like no other before.  Ok, Nixon did try some of that to be sure, but he didn’t have social media – especially Twitter.  30-40% of the American public will continue to believe every despicable thing that is said to discredit whoever might even think about turning on Trump.  Republican Congressmen and women, while perhaps not really believing it, will nonetheless remain quiet for the most part, if not actively participate in the personal attacks.

High tech lynching?  Clarence Thomas, you ain’t seen nothing yet.

Jeff Sessions appears to be next in line to take a fall and, when he does, I hold no hope whatsoever that he will be the new John Dean.  He has proven time and again to be a totally impotent pawn of the Donald.  He has already meekly accepted, without any personal defense, or any defense of the justice department which he serves, that incredible trashing unleashed upon him by the Donald this past week.  He may be holding out on resigning, hoping that being fired by the Donald will somehow be more honorable than resignation.  But he is a goner, make no mistake.

Once Sessions is gone, he will be replaced by someone who is ready and willing to fire Mueller and to declare the investigation complete.  Trump will not nominate anyone who has not given him his personal assurance that he will do so.  The Senate will, of course, demand that the new prospective Attorney General will promise not to fire Mueller, and the nominee will either outright lie saying he will not, or will try and get away with an answer that provides him wiggle room.  The second is the more likely scenario because that will also give Republican Senators more wiggle room to confirm his nomination.

Once a new attorney general is confirmed, it will only be a matter of time before the Trumped up excuses will be used to justify Mueller’s firing.  You may hear some verbal outrage on the Republicans part, but they won’t have the stones enough to do anything about it.   Because, if they do, Trump’s voters may no longer have enough power to get them re-elected, but they still have enough power within the Republican party to get them primary’ed right out of any chance to even run for re-election.

012 - The Russia Probe - Wink Wink.jpg

What about any other potential John Deans?

Sean Spicer?  Give me a break.  Talk about being spineless.  Anyone who has continually allowed themselves to be the subject of well-deserved ridicule for repeating the boldface lies of his boss, has unquestionably demonstrated that he has no spine nor self-respect.

Mike Flynn?  He has proven to be one of many unprincipled guns for hire with whom the Donald has surrounded himself.  “I have a story to tell.”  Yeah, right.  I’ll believe that when it happens.  If anyone has received a proactive, secret guarantee of a pardon, it would be Flynn.

Steve Bannon?  He would be SO lynched by the loyal Trumpsters, and even the Breitbart crowd, that I have never even given his turning on Trump any consideration whatsoever.

Family members – Ivanka, Donny Jr. and Jared?  Hey, what’s a family for?  Did you really think the Donald placed Ivanka and Jared so close JUST because they are family?  Would any of the Corleone family have ever turned on Vito … or Michael?  I don’t think so.  Even Fredo Corleone (uhh, I mean Eric Trump) didn’t turn on Michael.  But Fredo was such a total loser, he could have been easily manipulated into doing so without realizing it.  So family or not, Michael had to act on Fredo.   Sound familiar?  Watch your back, Eric.

Paul Manafort?  Hmmm.  Another of those guns for hire like Flynn, but I see a difference with him.  Manafort has received millions in payments from foreign governments, and also likely has many more millions in loans to many of those governments and individuals.  He was also jettisoned from Trump’s orbit fairly early on, but still was with him long enough to be able to reveal really damaging information.  I’ll bet I’m not the only one who thinks Manafort is a good candidate as being the one who blew the whistle on Donny Jr’s meeting with the Russians last June.  What a great way to stick the knife into both Donny Jr and to Jared, with whom I’m sure there is no love lost with Manafort.  I’m sure that possibility has not been lost on the Donald either.

Manafort is capable of being squeezed big-time by Mueller, should Mueller’s investigation be allowed to continue.  He is probably another very good candidate for one of those proactive pardons.  But even with a pardon, he would still be on the hook to a lot of unsavory people, i.e. governments, for those millions in payments and loans.  Trump may be able to pardon him but he can’t offer witness protection.  That may be Mueller’s ace-in-the-hole.

012 - Mission Accomplished

No one else really comes to mind.  It would take someone who is in a high enough position, and who has been with Trump long enough, to do any significant damage … and I don’t see anyone else who fits that bill.

I should say … no one other  than Putin.  He has always held all the cards, but why kill the Golden Goose – the gift that keeps on giving?  Even if Trump is not able to get sanctions lifted, which is looking increasingly less likely, Trump has done so much already to strengthen Putin’s position in the world, that Putin can already claim the hacking and collusion to be a phenomenal success.  The confusion, disarray, chaos and the elemental distrust and division that have been taken to such an incredible level in American society can only be considered icing on the Putin cake.  He is such a clear winner in all of this.  What a grand reward for someone who has deceived, stolen and assassinated his way to the top.

So congrats, Vlad.  Satan would be proud … if he weren’t so envious.

012 - Hand up Trumps Ass - in text

011 – Democrats need to clearly articulate what Republican health reform really means (An Editorial)

Although it hardly qualifies as an example of unique insight on my part, in my last editorial I did pretty much call the new Republican/conservative strategy of excusing Donny Jr & company’s collusion by now saying that collusion is simply opposition research – it is certainly not a crime.  Donny Sr added, predictably, “I’m sure most people would have taken that meeting.”

But regarding healthcare, Trumpcare (or Wealthcare) amounts to eliminating the taxes and subsidies, and paying for that by taking away virtually all coverage provided by the Affordable Care Act, and then replacing it with the opportunity to purchase junk insurance, which would only be an affordable (though basically worthless) option for the (currently) young and healthy.

It cannot possibly be anything other than that because the single, most important goal of the proposed legislation is to remove the taxes and subsidies of the Affordable Care Act … and those are the only current ways to finance the things provided in the Affordable Care Act.

011 - Repeal Education - we have a winner.jpg

It is now, more than ever, incumbent upon Democrats to hammer Republicans with a consistent, and coherent, vision for the American people that the crap about allowing Obamacare to fail on its own is just that – crap.  Not only are Republicans not doing anything whatsoever to address fixing the issues with the Affordable Care Act, while retaining that which the vast majority of Americans believe is in fact working, they are actively doing things to sabotage it.

Fortunately, the whole “repeal only” thing does not appear to be going anywhere.  One thing of which I was not previously aware, the “repeal only” legislation being proposed essentially only repeals the taxes on those making over $200,000 annually, and also removes the subsidies for the insurance companies.  That is all Republicans can do with only a 51 vote margin in the Senate.  To do more, they would need 60 votes.

Even if Republicans were able to pass a straight repeal, stuff like covering pre-existing conditions and allowing kids to stay on their parents’ insurance longer would be left intact and in effect.  But without any way to finance those things, that would clearly cause insurers who stay in the markets to raise rates through the roof, or to cause other insurers just to leave the markets entirely – either of which would make the Affordable Care Act instantly unsustainable.

The other thing already being done, without the need to modify any existing law, is just to not renew funding that provides those subsidies to the insurance carriers.  Apparently, those funds are something that have to be renewed each year – they are not automatic as long as the Affordable Care Act is in effect.  Trump has not renewed them to this point and appears unlikely to do so.

Another thing that could, and likely will be done by Trump, is to fail to enforce the individual mandate contained in the Affordable Care Act.  That also would likely doom our current system since having only sick people purchase insurance is also not sustainable for the insurance marketplace.

These things absolutely HAVE to be clearly articulated by the Democrats.  The other thing Democrats need to do is to refer to the Affordable Care Act not so much by name, but to rather identify it by the provisions it makes – Medicare subsidies, pre-existing condition coverage, extended coverage for grown children, removing caps on lifetime catastrophic coverage.

011 - Repeal Education - I always forget

Polls just are not asking the right questions.  They often ask, in various ways, do you want Trumpcare or Obamacare?  Anytime the “I could shoot someone in the street” crowd, and many others, hear “Obama”, they immediately say “Hell no”.  But a lot of them love the new coverages that are provided – they just often don’t really understand that those coverages are being provided by the Affordable Care Act.

Many people in Kentucky, for example, say that they hate Obamacare but that they love their own Kynect healthcare option.  It turns out that Kynect IS Obamacare – just named differently in Kentucky.  Oh, by the way, Rand Paul is one of the Kentucky senators who dearly wants to just repeal Obamacare and thinks Trumpcare doesn’t go far enough.  Are Kentucky voters even aware of the effect of what Rand Paul is proposing on their behalf?  Someone should let them know that no more Obamacare means no more Kynect.

With a less than a 15% approval rating for Trumpcare nationwide, and I’m sure even less than that if people truly understand what repeal-only would mean, Republicans have obviously not been able to convince even a small portion of the population that their healthcare plans have any virtue.

But as I have stated in previous editorials, the goal should not be to try and change the minds of the Trump base.  If they have not budged in their support by now, it just ain’t gonna happen.  Rather, the message should be directed toward educating the other 60-65% who need to clearly understand what is  happening with healthcare … and just as importantly, what is not  happening.

011 - Repeal Education - we mde 4 major changes