I would remind you that this is the system Hillary and the Left would seek to implement when ObamaCare fails. These are the types of things Americans will have to endure. Just wait till the central planners really control our health care
A Canadian couple of 62 years hoped to spend the rest of their lives together. Unfortunately, they can now only see each other every other day due to being admitted into separate nursing homes.
For the last eight months, Wolf and Anita Gottschalk of Surrey, B.C have been forced to live apart. On top of their heartbreaking situation, the Gottschalks must endear tear-jerking goodbyes multiple times a week.
What could cause such a heartbreaking situation you ask? Well, just wait
A family member, usually their granddaughter Ashley Bartyik, drives the nearly one hour commute multiple times a week so that her 81-year-old grandmother Anita can see her 83-year-old grandfather Wolf, who has now been diagnosed with lymphoma in addition to his dementia.
“This is the saddest photo I have ever taken. As you can see they are both wiping away tears! But why? It was taken in Surrey at Yale road, a transitional facility for people waiting to get into nursing homes, that’s where my Opi is!” Bartyik, 29, began her Facebook post on Thursday, that’s been shared over 3,000 times.
“After 62 years together in marriage they have been separated for 8 months due to backlogs and delays by our health care system, whom have the power to have my grandpa moved to the same care facility as my grandmother. They cry every time they see each other, and it is heartbreaking,” she continued.
Got that? Canada’s health care system, which the Left raves about is causing this anguish because, central planning. This is where Collectivism will take us. This is what happens when we reject individualism and individual liberty. This is what happens when people become numbers, which is exactly what the Left dreams about. This is what Hillary will implement if she possibly can.
Still think it does not matter if you do not vote? Think again!
Sorry, I was on Twitter. I felt it was necessary to dispel the widely-held myth, adored by #NeverTrumpers, that somehow attacking Trump relentlessly does not aid Hillary Clinton, and that they are not choosing Hillary Clinton by choosing to be NeverTrump.
All choices have consequences. By supporting Trump, I am responsible for the consequences of a Trump victory – and those consequences could indeed be dire.
But a childish morally-unserious fantasy has infected the #NeverTrump not-so-intellgentsia, that they can agitate for Hillary Clinton – by relentlessly disparaging Trump – and somehow, they are not responsible for the consequences of the Hillary presidency they are bucking for.
They’ve dreamed up this self-pleasing, responsibility-evading dreamscape in which those who plump for Trump are responsible for the outcomes of a Trump presidency, but, for no explanation thusfar discoverable, they are not responsible for the outcomes of the Hillary presidency they’re agitating for.
I tried to explain to them that there is no such thing as a consequence-free choice – all choices have consequences, both on the upside and the downside – and both the upside and downswide consequences must be considered by any adult, intellectually-serious person in making his choice.
But they like this idea that, like little children, they are free to gambol and play in the fields and this does not even perturb the leading edge of a butterfly’s wing, and so they just keep teling me “No you’re wrong” without saying why I’m wrong.
Which, seriously, is a rather important part of any argument beginning with the words “You’re wrong.”
I ask people: When you knocked Obama in 2012, and wrote posts and comments noting his flaws, did you think you were doing nothing to improve Mitt Romney’s chances of winning the presidency?
If so– why the fuck did you bother?
Of course, this is silly; everyone knows that when one buys ads attacking a candidate, one is helping that candidate’s opponent win.
The #NeverTrumpers are filling their blogs, magazines, and Twitter timelines with nonstop political advertising (free) against Trump, and maintain, just because they say so and because it pleases them to think so, this does exactly nothing to help Hillary, and they are therefore not responsibe for her election.
Or let me put it this way: I am not hoping for Trump to get into some serious international snafu by supporting him. Yet I know that is a very real possibility if he’s president.
Should this happen, I can’t just say “But I didn’t want trump to screw up so badly.”
People would say – no, but you knew the risks in supporting him, and you supported him anyway; you are therefore morally responsible for this.
Yet the #NeverTrumpers claim that the obvious, inescapable outcome of their position – that Hillary Clinton will be the president – is not their responsibility, just because they didn’t intend that as a pirmary matter.
No, but they were completely aware it was the natural and inevitable consequence of their position.
So why would a Trump supporter be responsible for a foreign policy catastrophe he didn’t even know for a fact would happen, when a #NeverTrumper claims to be innocent of the Hillary Presidency they know beyond a shadow of any doubt is the direct and inescapable consequence of the NeverTrump posiition?
They’re responsible for it. They don’t want to be, but they are.
I don’t particularly want to be on the hook for a Trump presidency, but, being a morally serious person who has not yet delegated my thinking to the Twitter Hivemind, I recognize that by taking the action of lending him my support, I am responsible for the conseqyences of that act.
Why do the childish #NeverTrumpers mewl that they, alone in the universe, are not responsiblee for the consequences of their own choices?
I understand the #NeverTrump impulse. I’ve expressed it myself. After Trump’s boorish, vulgar, half-insane attack on Cruz’s wife, I announced “I’m done” with Trump and vowed to never vote for him.
I understand #NeverTrump, emotionally. I think there’s merit in the position.
However, we have difficult choices to make. And difficult choices should be treated as what they are – difficult, hard choices requiring moral seriousness and rigorous cost-benefit analysis.
They should not be made – artificially and falsely – into easy-breezy decisions where one just says “I will do everything I can to make sure Trump is defeated, and I shall never give a thought to the prospect of a Hillary presidency, and I should never allow my shoulders to feel the burden of the consequences of the choice I am making.”
Real men – and tough-minded women – do not go fleeing tough choices by simply hallucinating an “Officer Dimes, please come and save me” miracle solution.
Either Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton will be president in November.
If you think Hillary would be a better president – or if Trump is so repulsive to you you cannot support him even if you think Hillary would be worse – fine. I respect your opinion.
We all have different brains. We all have different priorities.
But what I must insist you cannot do – what i will not permit you to do – is fantasize that while a Trump supporter is resonsible for the gaffes and disasters of a President Trump, you are somehow innocent of the purges and witchhunts of a President Hillary.
Trump supporters will own the consequences of a Trump presidency – and Hillary supporters, both those who declare it proudly and those who wish it secretly – own the consequences of a Hillary presidency.
Adults accept the consequences of their choices.
Only children run from them, or cross their fingers behind their backs and claim that’s a charm insulating them from the consequences of their choices.
Some decisions are hard. They should be respected as being hard.
And no, Officer Dimes is not coming to save you from the dilemma you face.