Editor’s note: Fred Lucas’ reporting on a possible move by President Trump to compel Congress to live with Obamacare, and on a surprising U.S. vote at a U.N. human rights gathering, stirred response from The Daily Signal’s audience. We’ve got some of that and more in today’s roundup. Write us at [email protected]—Ken McIntyre
Dear Daily Signal: I have for 30 years of my adult life resented that Congress does not have to live under the laws that they pass upon we the people (“How Trump Could Force Congress and Its Staff to Live Under Obamacare”). I am just one grateful 74-year-old widow with no clout except God and the brain and heart that he gave me.
I am praying that whatever needs to happen to level the playing field in our governance will come to pass in my lifetime. Much of my grief is in the apparent fact that most people come to Congress as ordinary citizens of ordinary finances with a heart for this marvelous country, but are quickly corrupted by the money to be made by “getting along and going along.”
Most retire as fabulously wealthy people. I don’t resent wealth, just what some are willing to do to achieve their wealth. Many “statesmen” have been turned into “politicians” by money or blackmail from corrupt manipulators inside and outside our government.
I am so very thankful for Fred Lucas and for The Daily Signal, which keeps me informed without having to suffer through the garbage of the manipulative “news” of the day. May God protect all of you who are trying to inform us of the dangers lurking in our government.—Iris Chandler
Thank you for Fred Lucas’ interesting and timely reporting on this issue of the Obamacare exemption Congress voted for itself. It is important that people know about the many things that our government legislates or regulates that the public live with while our own representatives and senators create a loophole for themselves. These exemptions often are extended to include crony corporations or political groups and figures. I will be sharing your article with my friends and family.—Cynthia Ziegler
Do members of the Senate hate President Trump so bad that they would take it out on the American taxpayers, the people who put him in the White House?
If that is the case, then they should pay out the nose like the rest of us for Obamacare, something that we can’t even use. The only thing we are doing is paying the health insurance companies for people who get health care for free.—Debbie Biersdorfer
— The Daily Signal (@DailySignal) August 5, 2017
Making Congress and its staff live with Obamacare would be a great move to speed them up to repeal and replace it. It’s about time for our exempted elected members to wake up and smell the coffee. President Trump needs to fulfill the primary reason he was elected, and he needs to do it now.—Mike Briel
A move like that could get support across all demographics, and it would be hard for the media to say anything wrong about such an action. And it’s a move the president’s new chief of staff won’t be afraid to support. So hopefully it will get done actually, and not just tweeted about.—Angela Mae
Members of Congress put their pants on just like the rest of us, and are in some cases not as honest as other Americans. You don’t see any member of Congress in worn-out clothes, driving a beat-up old car, going without food, not having a haircut. Let them get like us and reach in their pockets, not ours, for food, clothes, and car expenses.—James Dally
Just do it! President Trump is backed by our Constitution on this one. Prove to us, who voted for you, that you are serious about draining the swamp.—James A. Bussell
Maybe I will eat my words, but given the current attitude of Congress toward Trump, I doubt he will do it. Sorry, but I will believe it when I see it.
We are seven months into the Trump administration and the congressional Republicans haven’t delivered and the Democrats are obstructionists. I hope I have to eat my words. Only time will tell.—Steven Grigsby
— Hans von Spakovsky (@HvonSpakovsky) July 28, 2017
Sifting the Evidence of Voter Fraud
Dear Daily Signal: Reading Hans von Spakovsky’s commentary, I seriously don’t know how this is even a conversation. Only people who are eligible to vote should be allowed to vote (“New Report Exposes Thousands of Illegal Votes in 2016”).
We don’t hold surprise elections with the exception of special occasions, so if people want to vote they have time to take the steps to be able to. And instead of crying that it discriminates against anyone, how about helping those people get ready to vote? You know, help each other. Seems like a better solution than lip service.
A very small number of illegal votes might not mean much to a national election, but certainly can change local and state elections. And wouldn’t it make sense for the states to want to police their own business, so the federal government doesn’t feel inclined?—Rex Ely
Gerrymandering is the biggest threat to and corruption of a process of free voting. Stop looking for “fake” threats that are only good for 30-second talking points to your own choirs.—Terry Harper
This incompetent system is indicative of Big Government and Big Business getting together to rip off the people.
In 2002, Big Government passed the Help America Vote Act, which resulted in its giving Big Business hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars to create a software monopoly of state-run voter registration systems that are worthless today. “Motor voter” registration is also a scam where people obtaining a driver’s license are automatically registered to vote.
Return the government to the people by building up local government.—Les Gubernatio
I would hope we all agree that the integrity of the vote count is an important element in any fair election. But as long as our news media no longer adheres to truthful news reporting, voters aren’t as informed as they need to be to make the best choice among candidates.
Political bias and propaganda flood the airways and serve to confuse voters and suppress the truth. Our nation is divided over many issues, and unless we return to the value system that made this country great in the first place America’s best days are behind us.—Wes Potts
Anything that invalidates a legitimate vote is serious, be it gerrymandering, duplicate votes, illegal votes, fraudulent votes. Our vote is the citizens’ voice. It is not for illegals, legals (until they become citizens), those with visas, etc. Anyone who obstructs this should be charged, jailed, and tried for treason against America and the American citizen.—Frances Arnone
— The Daily Signal (@DailySignal) August 7, 2017
Should Transgender Americans Serve in the Military?
Dear Daily Signal: Regarding Jamie Shupe’s commentary, I personally think it’s inexcusable to have gender reassignment surgery offered in the military (“I Was a Transgender Soldier. Gender Dysphoria Poses Real Problems for the Military”). You’re there to do a job. Do the job, and if you want the surgery after discharge, have at it. Otherwise, transgender individuals are as fit to serve as anyone else.—Edward Buatois
A brilliant commentary on a very complex issue. A real service to our country. Thank you.—Leanna M. Cumberland
I don’t know anyone who hates the transgendered community. What I hate, and probably the vast majority of Americans hate, is being forced to accept something that we disagree with. When you use the term “hate,” ‘hater,” and so on, you are effectively shutting off any further discussion.—Peter Kurilecz
I am also a transgender military veteran. Jamie Shupe, you should speak for youself, considering your military experience was unique to you. Serving my country was the greatest honor of my life, as it is for most veterans, including other transgender veterans.—Cash Court
Allowing transgenders to serve in the military adds another large layer of evaluations to military readiness. The training structure would now have to be capable of evaluating gender dysphoria symptoms in service members. Do we want or need that? Perhaps transgenders could serve in other capacities.—James Brokaw
It’s not transgenderism, but gender dysphoria. What was once gay pride has morphed into this abnormal LGTBQI bombardment by the left. Now they force it on kindergarten kids, molding a new kind of being, a common talking point in our schools of higher learning.
Replacing traditional values with multiple or same-sex parents, where NAMBLA lobbies to decriminalize child molestation by rebranding it as “soft pedephilia.” If a child is game, then it’s not a crime.
This is the mindset of some really sick people. Our culture now forces us to remove the American flag from our front lawns, and no flag mailboxes are allowed. We’re removing historic Civil War statues from public squares or erasing the names from buildings and roads because a few a**holes find it offensive.
Less than 2 percent of the population claim ownership of this LGTBQI confusion, but they manage to have the mysterious power of affecting our laws.—Art Anton
— The Daily Signal (@DailySignal) August 7, 2017
Trump State Department Boosts ‘Nontraditional’ Families
Dear Daily Signal: Regarding Fred Lucas’ story on the U.S. vote at the U.N. Human Rights Council, the nuclear family is still the basic social unit of Western civilization (“US Backing for ‘Nontraditional’ Families at UN Conference Raises Eyebrows”).
It is also the basic social unit of all societies that thrive, and it has been that way since the beginning of recorded history. No society has survived more than one generation with the individual as its basic social unit.
It is the family that converts savages (children) into productive citizens, and when the family fails at its task, society is weakened. Historically, Christian law recognized family law as the first order of a healthy society. Spouses were not even allowed, by law, to bear witness against each other in court until the 20th century. Spouses could not be compelled by law to testify against each other until after the middle of the century.
This recognition of the centrality of the family to our culture is something that we should be very reluctant to set aside without much consideration and study. Stating that “it’s not fair” is a playground argument; we need to do better than that.
I cannot understand the argument that recognizing the importance of the nuclear family is somehow an attack on individuals or on single parents. When the family breaks down or cannot hold together, there are often tragic consequences. But that does not mean anything beyond the fact that a good family requires hard work and sacrifice; things that are in short supply in our society today.
There is no reliable evidence and there have been no studies that I have been able to find that support the idea that homosexual couples are effective parents; they may be, but the jury is still out on that one. I do not say that to denigrate loving, homosexual relationships, but just to say the obvious: We are still waiting to see how this works out for the children.
To repeat: Honoring, supporting, and helping to recognize the importance of the nuclear family is most assuredly not an attack on single parents or on nontraditional approaches to child rearing.—Bill Tanksley
The individual is and always has been the prime bedrock building block of freedom here in the U.S., and this vote at the U.N. conference is consistent with that. But the “traditional family” is and always must remain the prime bedrock organizational unit of the U.S. and every other nation that wants to prosper.
The radical gays have pushed through their radical agenda, the purpose of which is the destruction of the family, not the support of those in their organization who are in need of treatment for their gender dysphoria, and other nontraditional sexual proclivities.
Still, on a world stage in which 1.6 billion uncivilized and ideologically irrational people think it’s perfectly OK to throw gays and other LGBT types off buildings, much less conquer, enslave, and kill every unbeliever for the glory of Allah, I can see this U.N. vote to affirm the primacy of the individual, including LGBT, even if they are somewhat confused, or even mentally ill, as the only real choice our representative had.
But the world stage is not the U.S., and so here at home we must do everything in our power to see that the traditional family is supported at all levels of society and every avenue of public policy.—Mike Briggs
It’s up to parents to educate their kids on social issues. We can’t expect politicians, even those purporting to be conservative, to back the wishes of the conservative wing of the electorate.
It’s been made clear for the past 30 years that politicians swing whichever way the re-election winds blow. I can tell you this knowing full well it will ruffle some feathers: Ted Cruz would have directed the State Department quite differently.—Marcus Junius Brutus
The U.N. is not a form of government, it is nothing more than a bunch of elites who think their opinions count. If you do a deep research of the U.N. you will find that what they claim as human rights has nothing to do with human rights, and climate change has nothing to do with the environment.—Lynne Morris
This is not a significant issue. U.N. resolutions carry little teeth in reality, and are symbolic. I suspect the State Department’s stance is based on opposing other governments who would wantonly torture or kill sexual deviants.
I was taught to hate the sin and not the sinner. I have not read the text, but I can understand a vote against a resolution if it were written in a way that tolerates or condones the unjustifiable torture and killing of individuals.—James Monaco
— Ken McIntyre (@KenMac55) August 2, 2017
When Radicals Use the Census to Achieve Political Ends
Dear Daily Signal: “In traditional Marxism, the division was between the oppressed working class and the oppressing bourgeoisie (middle class),” John Fonte and Mike Gonzalez write in their commentary headlined “Should Left-Wing Activists Like Linda Sarsour Be Allowed to Divide America Through the Census?”
Boy, has that changed! But I can’t imagine it ever actually being true. Today, the working class is the middle class. The poor, at least in America, have far too much welfare and far too many government programs available to them, so they often don’t work at all.
Man is designed to work. He’s not fulfilled or even happy when he can’t work.—Jeffrey Moore
Freedom of speech in North America is thwarted and manipulated. If I were to say, “Go eliminate Linda Sarsour, as she is a threat to this nation,” I probably would be chastised.
Yet Linda Sarsour can boldly command others to go kill President Trump, and she’s able to roam free. I can tell you that should Hillary Clinton and her cronies have been in the White House, such would not be uttered by Ms. Sarsour. A sour case indeed.
If the populace does not wake up to the stealth infiltration of Islamist-dedicated militants, it will not be a pleasant outcome in a not too distant future. This nauseating mouthpiece needs to be sent back to where she belongs, and it’s not anywhere in North America.—Peter Riden
If we do not get back to being “Americans” soon, persons like this soon will have our nation divided into warring factions. And that will be the real end to the America that the entire world needs to exist, with freedom and the chance to live a good life.
I remember the years when history told of immigrants falling to their knees and kissing the ground when they arrived in New York. What happened to those kind of immigrants?—James Barrett Jr.
What really needs to be done is remove questions about race and religion in the U.S. census. Imagine how much this would affect lawmakers and policies for the good.—Matthew Rensen