One of the strategies Speaker Paul Ryan used in attempting to sell the American Health Care Act was to include defunding Planned Parenthood as part of the deal. It was a good attempt to sugarcoat “Obamacarelite” with some conservative honey for positive press and leverage against right-wing opposition to the bill, but it obviously didn’t work. While the dust is settling from their repeal and replace debacle, now is the time to introduce a new standalone bill to get rid of Planned Parenthood’s federal funding once and for all.

It makes strategic sense for both Congress and the White House to make this happen quickly. Fingers are already pointing in every direction. They need a high-profile win and this is just the thing to do it. Defunding Planned Parenthood will reassure conservatives that the Trump and/or Ryan agenda was not derailed by their AHCA loss.

The next big battle they plan on tackling is likely tax reform. That’s going to take time. Defunding Planned Parenthood will not. Drafting it and pushing it through committees would take no time at all. They could have it on President Trump’s desk in April. They can initiate their next moves on tax reform once Planned Parenthood is defunded.

I’m not going to go into a long diatribe of why Planned Parenthood needs to be defunded from a pro-life perspective. Either you’re in favor of it or not and nothing I can say can sway you. However, if you’re in favor of defunding, then you should be in favor of doing it quickly. At over half a billion dollars a year, it’s not a drop in the proverbial bucket. The longer we wait, the more money gets used to kill unborn Americans. This should have been done already, but I can understand the perceived need to attach it to the AHCA for sales and promotional purposes even if I absolutely disagree with the action itself. Ryan’s strategy allowed more babies to be killed. This should have been a Day 1 issue.

As a Federalist, I’m not giving them this advice for political reasons. The AHCA debacles has helped interest in the new party to spike, so I’m not trying to help the GOP clean up their political mess. However, we’re talking about human lives. I’ll happily push politics aside if it means one more child being saved.

Instead of using defunding Planned Parenthood as a negotiating chip, Congress needs to bite the bullet and make it happen right now. It’s quick, easy, and would draw the attention of mainstream media. Considering the obliteration the GOP is currently receiving this news cycle, it behooves them to turn the narrative towards saving the unborn rather than internal bickering.

As I write this, the House is pushing for a floor vote on the American Health Care Act. It “hangs in the balance” as some mainstream media news outlets are saying, but that doesn’t really paint the picture properly. In reality, it hangs over the GOP’s head in two major ways.

If it passes, things get really interesting in the Senate. There, the GOP cannot afford more than a couple of internal detractors and in the current form, there are more than enough. We haven’t seen the final version, but unless major changes were made, it’s very possible it could pass the House and get shot down in the Senate.

If it doesn’t pass the House, the spotlight is on the Freedom Caucus. President Trump has allegedly threatened Congressman Mark Meadows and others with losing their seats in 2018 if they don’t vote for it. Just as in the Senate, it would take major revisions for most Freedom Caucus members to reverse their publicly stated stance that they will vote against it.

This bill in its current known form is not what conservative/Federalist voters have asked for, nor is it what they were promised. I’ve gone on record as calling it Obamacarelite, RINOcare, Ryancare, and Swampcare. Based upon the latest push by the President, I’m calling it Trumpcare. He didn’t write it, but he’s pushing for it hard. President Obama didn’t write the Affordable Care Act, but he pushed for it just as hard as Trump is pushing for the AHCA.

Here’s the thing. People weren’t dying on the streets before Obamacare. I’m not so naive as to think we can or even should go back to the previous system. In fact, I think the previous system was already too burdened by government regulations. As conservatives who believe in the free market economy, we recognize that the best way to make health care truly affordable for the masses is to get government out of the picture. They need to open it up to competition across state lines.

Some will point out that tens of millions of Americans will “lose” their health care if we don’t pass something. They’d be technically right. However, a large bulk of those “losing” their health care coverage will do so willingly, as should be their right. There are conservatives who point out that it’s not fair for people to not carry health insurance and rely on taxpayers to pay big for their emergency care when they need it, but that’s singular and very shortsighted. The cost to taxpayers to cover uninsured emergency procedures is infinitesimally small compared to the cost we pay for ACA or the cost we would pay if AHCA passes.

What about pre-existing conditions? I have some experience with that, though I won’t bore you with the details. I’ll tell you this: government should be the last line of defense only. With both ACA and AHCA, they are inserting themselves into the front lines for health care. The community, charities, family, friends, and organizations designed specifically for such things will help those who cannot get their health needs met due to not being able to get covered. In a world with GoFundMe, it’s very unlikely that anyone who needs something won’t be able to get it. For those who do, that’s when the government as the bottom safety net can come in and save the day. This level of engagement should be very rare. If there’s minimal involvement by government to simply keep people from falling all the way through the cracks once they’ve failed to receive enough help through all the other options, that’s still a fraction of the cost to taxpayers.

The net result of full repeal would be to allow the consumer-driven market to push competition and make insurance companies beholden to the people. It amuses me when people say, “But repeal will only make the health insurance executives richer!” As Trump would say… “Wrong!” They love having millions of Americans who would never willingly purchase health insurance being forced to buy it by their government overlords.

Get government out of health insurance and premiums will go down for a vast majority of Americans. Allow the free market economy and the crowdfunding power of 2017 (plus charities, family, and community) to help those who need it the most. Government’s only role should be as the absolute last resort. Just repeal it.

Update: Instalanche thanks Steve and well done JD. For those new here JD is one of our Magnificent Seven writers. So if you like what you see from our full time twice a week writers like JD Rucker (Thursday Afternoons and Sunday Evenings) Fausta Rodriguez Wertz (Wednesday and Friday Afternoons) Baldilocks (Tuesday and Saturday Evenings) Our Weekly Writers like Zilla of the Resistance (Friday Evenings) RH (NG36B) Saturday Afternoon , John (Marathon Pundit) Ruberry (Sunday afternoons) Pat Austin (Monday Afternoons) and Christopher Harper (Tuesday Afternoons) Our part Time Writers Jerry Wilson (Most Thursdays), Michigan Mick (Twice a month on Mondays), Pastor Kelly (occasional Fridays), and our monthly/substitute writes Ellen Kolb, Tech Knight and Jon Fournier (Wednesday evenings) then please consider subscribing to help me pay them.


Choose a Subscription level



Your subscription pays the writes (except the two who won’t take pay) and helps me toward my goal of not just posting daily but doing this full time again. You will also get our podcasts directed mailed to you ahead of others.

Or If you want to help with the incidental bills (like the massive hospital bills coming or the cost of the used car I need) but don’t want a monthly commitment please consider hitting daTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

And if you aren’t inclined or in a position to kick in financially, we will happily accept your prayers

As populist budget plans go, President Trump has delivered one that is certain to make his supporters happy and politicians terrified. For that, he deserves a great deal of kudos. When Nancy Pelosi says things like, “This budget is a really a slap in the face of the future,” she clearly doesn’t understand that it’s a slap intended to hit DC itself.

That’s the good news. This trend of doing the things he promised is arguably the most endearing part of the Trump’s early presidency. He said he was going to build a wall and he’s budgeting for it. He said he was going to boost the military and he’s finding the money in government agencies. As The Hill details:

Unveiled earlier in the day, Trump’s 2018 budget outline attempts to make good on the president’s campaign promise to boost the military and border security efforts while dramatically shrinking domestic programs across almost all other agencies. The proposed reductions include a 31 percent cut to the Environmental Protection Agency, 28 percent to the State Department, 18 percent to the Health and Human Services Department and 16 percent to the Army Corps of Engineers.

Now, let’s discuss the future. I’ve always been critical of Trump for being a “big government” guy and this budget doesn’t change that criticism. He’s making cuts to pay for things he promised, not because he’s trying to rein in DC. However, it can be used in the future as a blueprint to demonstrate major cuts in departments and agencies will not result in the end of their little bureaucratic worlds. Global warming isn’t going to send hurricanes ripping through Kansas. They’ll have to tighten up their belts, but they’ll survive. Even the agencies and departments that have no reason to exist such as Education and Environment will still continue. They’ll find a way. After all, they’re still running their individual departments with more money than many small countries use to run their entire governments.

This brings us back to the question of whether or not it’s good to up spending on the military and the border wall. As much as I’d like to say that we don’t need to spend the additional money, I can’t. The fiscally conservative principles of Federalism must be applied in stages. That means that the wasteful spending of the past combined with poor tax plans must still be reconciled. The borders need to be secured and the military needs to be brought up to snuff.

The question of whether or not Trump’s populist budget is justifiable won’t be answered this year. We’ll need to see what cuts can be made elsewhere. We’ll need to determine with portion of the administrative state can be killed off altogether. Most importantly, we need to make sure he doesn’t give into his big government leanings and continue big spending after his military and border security promises are fulfilled.

The President is making cuts to initiate his plans. Will he have the discipline to keep cutting and then to stop adding to spending once his projects are compete? If so, the slap in the face the Democrats are describing will only sting them and their big government goals.

Yesterday, I “helped” my second-oldest open her first credit union checking account. I say that I “helped,” but my only real contribution was telling her it’s okay if she doesn’t buy checks but keeps the 5 temporary checks she got from them as backups. “You won’t need them,” I said. “It’s 2017. Money is easier now than ever before.”

She’s still in high school but I put her one one of my credit cards to get her established. Having her as an authorized user gives her credit history while protecting her from making silly teenager mistakes. Every thing she uses it on must be approved, documented, and accounted for in the end. Now that she has a debit card, I’ll be using it to pay the expenses she accumulates on my card every month. If she’s ever short, I’ll work out a plan to cover it for her temporarily, but I anticipate she’ll never be short. So far she’s just used it for teenage essentials: gas, food, and an occasional pair of shoes when she’s worked extra hours.

As an active high school senior, she holds two jobs. I disagree with this particular choice but I support her right to make it. I wouldn’t say she’s overworked, necessarily, but it does create scheduling problems from time to time. She will learn from now until graduation one of two things: overextending herself brings challenges that she’ll want to avoid in the future or she’s capable of managing her time even when split between school, home, and work. Either way, it’s a great lesson I wish I’d have learned at her age.

Spend only what you can afford. Pay all of your bills on time. Work hard to generate enough revenue. Don’t go into debt unless absolutely necessary. These lessons are easy for a parent to teach a child, but they’ve clearly gone unlearned in Washington DC. More accurately, they’ve been ignored. The Democrats abandoned any semblance of fiscal responsibility a hundred years ago. The Republicans seem to ebb and flow in their understanding. Unfortunately, the current GOP-controlled Congress seems to have let those ideas completely fall to the wayside.

Obamacare must be fully repealed. Any replacement for it should be designed to systematically remove the federal government from the insurance business altogether. Defenders of the current plan will say that it’s a repeal that’s fixing the problem the only practical way going forward. The reality is that it’s the only way they imagine being able to pretend like they’re doing the right thing while still being economically irresponsible for the sake of votes.

One thing is guaranteed: if a Democrat were president today (God forbid), Congress would pass full repeal and either a conservative replacement or no replacement at all. Why? They’d know it would get vetoed. The fact that whatever they pass will likely be signed has forced them to reveal their real intention of continuing down the path towards big government fiscal failure just to avoid political losses in 2018.

There has never been a U.S. President like Donald Trump. It’s not his history, his ideologies, or even his style that make him completely unique. All of these traits have precedents in some form or fashion. The one thing that truly makes President Trump different from every other President before him is his ability to make mainstream media look like absolute fools.

Journalists have always had the upper hand. When they had a President they didn’t like such as George W. Bush, they could selectively pick out quotes that made him look silly while aggressively examining his missteps with a microscope. When they had a President they liked such as Barack Obama, they could just hang out with the guy and fawn over his clever quips.

With Trump, the media is tripping all over themselves, falling flat on their faces in the process. They seem to finally understand that Twitter is where they’re going to get their “sound bites” instead of directly from the mouth of the President. This is the only positive in the eyes of the media to having Trump as President. Everything else makes their jobs not only harder but potentially dangerous.

We’ve seen disinformation coming from the administration that essentially puts the media on notice. They fell hard for reports that the National Guard would be turned into a deportation force. Only after reporting the memo did the administration come out and say it was false despite attempts to verify it before the report. This was done specifically to promote the administration’s narrative that mainstream media posts fake news constantly. More recently, we saw the President himself act as a “senior administration official” to leak a story that he “envisions a bill allowing many immigrants to stay in US.” The motivation behind this one was even funnier. He wanted to get press coverage before his big speech before Congress so he’d have more eyeballs watching.

Both strategies worked wonderfully.

I mention his penchant for disinformation first because it’s not new to the office. Every President tries with various degrees of success to manipulate the narrative. Some say Obama was great at it, but let’s remember that the press were willing victims in many cases when the last administration wanted to shift perspectives. Bush43 was awful at it (though some in the administration were decent). Bill Clinton was masterful. Bush41 barely even tried. Ronald Reagan was arguably the best in modern history… until Trump.

This is part of the game that must be played in Washington DC. The press knows it. Their thirst for a scoop often supersedes their desire for the truth, so they’ve always played the game and hoped to come out on top as often as possible. With Trump, they’re quickly being taught (though likely not learning) that his administration has the upper hand.

With that important piece out of the way, let’s look at the thing that makes Trump unique.

Truly useless and bound to be replaced

Most pundits are aware that President Trump is pushing the narrative of mainstream media being loaded with fake news because he doesn’t like them. That’s only half the story. The other half is more nefarious and must be watched carefully by both sides of the political aisle.

Trump doesn’t just want the mainstream media to look bad. He wants them eliminated. He wants them replaced. The easiest way for his agenda to be successful and his next term to be secured is if he can make the people disenchanted with the press itself. He’s known this for years and has discussed manipulating the media since the 1980s. The difference today, as president, is that Trump realizes they will never be on his side. He could make Barack Obama his personal adviser and start initiating leftist policies and they still wouldn’t like him. The leftists press aren’t as concerned with his policies as much as they’re concerned with the man himself. They hate him.

As a result, he’s going to eliminate them as much as possible.

Past presidents have had contentious relationships with the media, but Trump is going to continue to push the bounds far beyond anything we’ve ever seen. He’s making the relationship personal and relying on their unhinged desire to destroy him so he can paint them as dishonest and “enemies of the American people,” as he once declared. What the press doesn’t seem to understand is that he’s winning this war. They’re still playing the game as if it’s them versus him. He’s playing the game as if it’s them versus America. Over time, he’s going to win this battle.

That’s the good news. As someone who has had an issue with mainstream media for decades, I cheer his efforts. The only thing that concerns me is that he seems to be pushing to not only eliminate them but to replace them with his own people. Anyone who thinks he has Steve Bannon so high in the administration because of Bannon’s political know-how doesn’t get it. Yes, Bannon knows politics, but he knows the media better than just about anyone.

For the sake of space, I’ll wrap it up, but there’s so much more to explore on this topic. We’ll cover it further on Thursday. In the meantime, be mindful that President Trump is going to continue his attacks on the media and there’s nothing they can do about it.

Every day, the media loses credibility. Every day, President Trump gains new sympathizers who are sick of how mainstream media paints the administration and anything associated with Trump. Even the left is starting to notice the bias. As improbable as it sounded a few months ago, Trump’s war with the press is going to pay off. Their hatred for him will demonize them in the eyes of the people.

Senator Claire McCaskill of Missouri has a flare for the dramatic. She’s risen on the Democratic power charts by calling out Republicans every chance she gets. It’s no surprise that she would call out Attorney General Jeff Sessions after it was revealed he met with the Russian Ambassador during campaign season last year.

That’s a pretty powerful condemnation of her former peer in light of the recent revelations. The problem is that it’s a complete and total lie. She DID have a call with a Russian Ambassador in the past.

Twitter has a long memory. Granted, it was a group call and mentioning the Russian Ambassador within the group technically means she didn’t speak with him directly, right? We also should take into account that she didn’t actually meet with the Ambassador. Phone calls are easy to forget, especially for a busy Senator.

Uh oh…

No group call this time. No call at all, in fact. She actually met with the Russian Ambassador.

Here’s the problem with leftist hypocrisy (all hypocrisy, for that matter, though it predominantly spews forth from leftists): The rhetoric can only sustain the narrative for as long as the truth remains hidden. Senator McCaskill inserted herself into a situation and thought she was throwing stones. Instead, she was throwing a boomerang that came back to hit her.

The problem here isn’t the dishonesty. It isn’t the hypocrisy. It’s that mainstream media won’t say a thing about McCaskill’s lie. They’ll cover for her just as they tried to cover for Hillary and just as they covered for President Obama for eight years. This is the reason I write about politics. The real hypocrisy comes from the storytellers more so than the subjects of their stories.

As I’m writing this, many millions of people around the world are watching the Academy Awards. I know I’m not alone in “boycotting” the Oscars, though calling it a boycott is silly. It’s simply a choice. To say it’s a boycott is to belittle the efforts made by those who actually oppose the actions of organizations in sustained and systematic fashions. Like many Americans, I’m just deciding to do something else with my time.

I’ve ranted in the past about avoiding Hollywood. I didn’t watch the Golden Globes and I’ve called for conservatives to find entertainment alternatives, but this is a little different. The Oscars are the big show. It’s the one that is viewed around the world more than any other entertainment awards event. This year, people in other countries will watch the awards and will be able to come to only one conclusion: America hates its President and is falling apart as a result.

They don’t know the situation. Because they’re not bombarded with American news the way we are, their limited exposure means they have to form their conclusions from an incomplete data set. Watching the Oscars, they won’t realize that a large portion of Americans support President Trump. They’ll watch Hollywood liberal after Hollywood liberal bash Trump. They won’t hear a single one say anything positive about the President and if by some miracle they do (I don’t think Clint Eastwood or James Woods are winning anything this year), they’d hear the crowd throw out loud boos. This is Hollywood honoring Hollywood and disgracing the nation that gave them their opportunities.

I mentioned that what many of us are doing during the Oscars should not be called a boycott. If the ratings of this Academy Awards are low (which I doubt), it won’t faze any of them. The only way that they can be made to care about the absurdity of their liberal message is for their actual dollars to drop. That means it’s up to conservatives to stop watching. Sounds hard. It will be. Heck, I’m a movie fan. I moved out to the LA area because I wanted to get into the movie business a decade ago. Things change and I’m glad I didn’t follow through with that particular goal, but one thing is now clear to me. I cannot allow my hard-earned dollars to be used to promote the leftist agenda that spews forth from the people that Hollywood supports.

That’s not to say I won’t see any movies at all. I’m just going to be very selective. I’m going to support the stories that have conservative leanings. I’ll support directors and actors, few as they may be, who are unabashedly conservative. I’ll read more books, watch less television, and spend my downtime educating myself on YouTube with conservative and/or Christian messages.

In other words, I’m done with liberal Hollywood.

Leftists in Tinseltown will continue to embarrass our nation until we let them know that enough is enough. That doesn’t mean a Tweet or a blog post. The only way they’ll listen is if we hit them in their paychecks. The only way we can hit them in their paychecks is to stop spending portions of our paychecks to support them.

Democrats hate Republicans and will find nothing good in anything they do. Republicans hate Democrats who they believe can do no right. Federalists hate neither major party. They call out concepts they oppose and embrace actions they like. With President Trump’s reversal of President Obama’s bathroom decree, Federalists have several reasons to cheer the GOP leader.

Here’s a quick breakdown of the kudos I’ll soon be posting at the Federalist Party website:

  • Freedoms and rights must be protected as long as they don’t supersede “greater” rights and freedoms. In modern American society, we’ve seen a rise in people claiming the right to do things that contradict the rights of others. We’ve seen this in calls against “discrimination” when private business owners want to exercise their right to practice their religion. We’ve seen it with “reproductive rights” superseding a preborn American’s right to live. Most recently, we’ve seen it with Obama’s declared right for someone to pick their bathroom, an action that steps over a person’s right to privacy and safety. Trump’s move is the first real step in preserving freedom that we’ve seen in eight years.
  • “Leave it to the states.” I love it when a DC politician says these words. When it’s the President of the United States saying it, I’m downright giddy. When it comes to the convergence between education and safety, every Federalist can cry tears of joy when the President supports states’ rights.
  • One of the more subtle things this did was keeping the transgender issue apolitical. This is a cultural issue. Let’s remember that a transgender person has the exact same rights as anyone else. They’re able to use the restroom they were biologically built to use. This isn’t about giving them equal rights because they already have those. The transgender agenda is about giving them more rights than other people. Trump’s reversal brings the issue into its proper context as a cultural dilemma rather than a political one. That’s not to say it won’t be politicized, but when the White House sets the pace, it’s a great thing.

The way for this nation to move forward on such issues is for the the actions rather than the party to be the focus. As always, I’ll be critical when the actions call for it and I’ll give praise when the actions are righteous. This is an instance when I have no problem giving our President the full kudos he deserves.

There are two major things that should concern the American people about mainstream media. We’ve seen one of them very blatantly rear its hypocritical head since the start of election season in 2015: major left-wing bias. The other is even more dangerous and if we don’t take hold of the first, we’ll be faced with the second.

Before we get into the more severe threat of mainstream media, let’s focus on the one that’s clear and present. Mainstream media has been “left-leaning” for over four decades. Some may remember a time when the media was actually right-leaning. Those days are obviously behind us; anyone who doesn’t qualify for Social Security benefits has likely never seen right-leaning mainstream media (other than arguably Fox News and WSJ) in their adult life. The major shift that we witnessed in the most recent election cycle is unabashed bias. There was still a semblance of subtly in their bias during the Bush43-era. Today, they’re loud and proud about being leftists.

There are righteous cries by conservatives to do something about this problem. The Democratic Party’s propaganda wing has become so engrossed with their own rhetoric that they’re having a hard time understanding why there’s any opposition to them at all. It’s imperative that conservatives do what they can to simultaneously denounce mainstream media’s bias and to promote independent and conservative media that needs help in being the countermeasure to liberal talking heads.

It must be the people who bring about this change. It cannot be the government. This brings us to the bigger threat that could engulf us: state-run media. Today, it’s practically impossible for anyone to imagine a press that’s controlled by the government. It’s never been the case in America (despite rumored efforts by the “Deep State,” the CIA, and other powerful government entities) for the government to have control over the media, so very few are concerned about it. We should be.

If recent history has taught us anything, it’s that the sentiment of the American people can be shifted very quickly. In the beginning of Barack Obama’s presidency, nearly 70% of Americans opposed same-sex marriage. Even Californians outlawed it for a time. Today, less than 40% of Americans oppose it. In less than seven years, the sentiment on this topic was changed through liberal indoctrination in colleges, massive propaganda campaigns in the media, and pressure put on those who would oppose the practice.

What we’re seeing happening with the media is not indoctrination from one side. Both liberals and conservatives are starting to see needs for “restraints” on the media. Not to sound too conspiratorial, but the rise of the “fake news” narrative is designed to get us to not trust ANY media. There has always been fake news. In fact, it’s not any worse today than it was a decade ago. The difference is that we’ve put more of an emphasis on it through social media. We’ve given it a tangible name and defined it as a bogeyman to be feared.

Tearing down the 1st Amendment freedom of the press concept won’t start off as state-run media. It will start as “limits” to what can be reported. It has already started with calls by powerful people in government to rein in their reports by forcing verification before news can be published. This comes in the form of strengthening libel laws that yield consequences if reporters get a story wrong. All of this is being packaged in a way that the people can get behind without realizing that they’re supporting restraints that harm the Constitution itself.

The problems of fake news and liberal bias are real. The battle must be waged by the people, not the government. If we call for the government to take action, the only way they can solve the problem is by taking us several steps closer to the bigger problem of state-run media. Instead, we have the power as Americans to fight it through our voices and our dollars. I would love to help lead this effort, but there’s already too much on my plate. Someone needs to do it. Someone needs to step up and start directing the grassroots to fight the liberal bias and fake news problem without the government getting involved.

Mainstream media outlets must be made aware that if they’re going to be biased, they won’t get our money nor our page-views in the form of clicks. That’s not to say that there’s not room for commentary or op-eds, but those must be clearly delineated. Smaller media sites, particularly those who adhere to neutrality, need our support. As for conservative media, we’re currently outnumbered and outgunned. We need help to be the commentary that opposes our liberal counterparts.

All of this sounds hard. It will be. The alternative is for the government to step in and take action. That is not a valid solution. Once they start, history tells us they cannot help themselves. They’ll take it further and further until the media is a shell of what it once was. To those who say that this would be a good thing, remember that if they’re just a shell, someone will be pulling the strings. I’ll take a left-wing mainstream media over a government-controlled media any day of week. At least bias can be countered through discernment and spreading the word. Once the government gets involved, it quickly turns into oppression. If that’s allowed, it will be almost impossible to reverse.

The only righteous way to tackle the problems we’re seeing in the media is for the people to address it from the grassroots. Calls for media oversight from DC will not end well for Americans. We need a free press to stay free. We need free Americans to change the media’s ways with our voices and our dollars. We do not need anything that will harm the 1st Amendment regardless of how appealing that may seem to some today.

There are plenty of plans to repeal, replace, tweak, fix, improve, dismantle, and otherwise make changes to the Affordable Care Act, better known as Obamacare. I’m going to keep this short for the sake of simplicity because the answer isn’t hard. Repeal it. What you do after that will work out just fine.

Some will say, “But we need to have a plan in place or the GOP will get slaughtered in 2018 and 2020!” I don’t completely disagree, but there’s an important caveat to note.

There is no plan that doesn’t include installing some variation of socialized medicine that will prevent everyone from losing their coverage. The math simply doesn’t add up. You can’t take something as fiscally obtuse as Obamacare and replace it with something that yields the same results without being essentially the same thing. Yes, people will lose coverage. Yes, the media will play it up. Yes, the Democrats will point to it as a reason to regain power.

The only way to prevent the Great 2018 Slaughter of the Republican Party is to fulfill the promise that they made to repeal it, to invoke the mandate that the last election gave them, and to work like crazy to fight the negative optics associated with it. The sooner they do step one, the better. There are some who are secretly pushing to repeal Obamacare but to not have it take effect until after the election. This is unacceptable. Rip it off like a putrid old band aid and then govern the country amazingly going forward. That’s the only hope.

Here’s the thing. This isn’t new. The GOP has claimed to want to repeal Obamacare for six years. There has been more than enough time to plan it out, prepare for the consequences, and enact a plan to mitigate political damage done. Why are they now acting like this is a brand new development? Why aren’t they embracing perfectly good plans such as the Paul-Sanford bill? Why aren’t they following the lead of people like Ted Cruz who want to fulfill the promise they made?

There. I said it would be short.

What they do after this economic abomination is repealed will work out as long as it doesn’t include a similar monstrosity. The window of opportunity has been open. If they don’t take decisive action now that they have the chance, then they deserve the routing that they fear will happen by doing what they said they were going to do in the first place.