Free College

Obviously, the ability to afford college is a great impediment to many who wish to attend college. In terms of a harsh reality, that somewhat limits the number of applications received by colleges and universities due to the lack of funds on the part of some potential students. Beyond that, there are basic minimum requirements for entrance and in almost all instances there is competition for a limited number of vacancies.
Our Democratic presidential candidate is promising free college education in "public" colleges if she is elected. The first major hurdle to that is that "public" colleges are run by and controlled by the individual states, not the federal government. Would her idea be for the federal government to simply pay the state schools or would she attempt to take over the state schools? Just as a small aside, where would the funding be obtained for either approach? No matter which approach she attempted, the states’ control of and rights to the colleges would have to be usurped. Next, since she is promising free college, who would determine which potential students could attend since there is obviously not enough room for everyone who would want the free college degree? The answer to that would have to be a federal government controlled program to make the selections. Therefore, a criterion of some sort would have to be established by the government to decide which applicants could actually go to free college – a selection process which anyone with half-sense can realize would be disastrous.
A few factoids might help those who support Hillary based upon free college. From the 2014 and’15 college graduates:
51% of those graduates, who do actually have employment, state that they are working at jobs that do not require their degrees.
83% of them did not have any job secured prior to graduation
Only 39% of them, who do have jobs, are making more than $25,000 per year.
What then would statistics reveal if everyone who wanted a college education could attend for free and the program added many, many thousands of annual graduates?
As to the astronomical student loan debt claimed by many, it seems strange that the Federal program for Direct Unsubsidized Loans places an aggregate maximum in loans at $31,000 no matter how many years of attendance. Those who choose different kinds of loans are simply making a personal decision to become indebted to whatever level gives them comfort. Sure, they can borrow enough money to buy a new car, new clothes and live in a nice apartment, but if they are smart enough to get into college, surely they recognize there will come a time for payback.
Easy conclusion. Clinton’s promise of free college is a virtual impossibility and would serve no good purpose even if it could work.

Dilemma - a situation in which a difficult choice has to be made between two or more alternatives, especially equally undesirable ones.

So, the American people are about to vote for a new President. For many, the choice is simple as they have their minds made up about the person they wish to elect. For millions of others, there looms a great dilemma. Even more than issues of economy, immigration and border security, education, national defense, healthcare, abortion, new entitlements, taxes or any other subject, this particular election seems to hinge on personalities and, literally, a like or dislike for a candidate.
On the one hand there is a very experienced politician who has the ability to fend off repeated accusations of wrongdoing. From Benghazi, to emails, to her foundation, to her Wall Street speeches, to proven “pay for play” allegations, Hillary Clinton’s name is associated either unethical or illegal activities. She is, however, a female and that garners many votes on its own. She comes from the party that has mostly dominated big cities throughout the country and has given hope and promise to lower income citizens for years. Sure, they see to it that the welfare rolls are swollen, yet the folks who are recipients of “free” money, rent, and food stamps are relegated to second class or lower standards of living. The party has done nothing to help these people find real jobs, elevate their living standards and conform to the laws of the land and there exists no real hope on the horizon for them other than a possible raise in free money payments. People, in general, do not trust her yet they choose to overlook all the proven legal and ethical violations attributed to her. Primarily, they do that based upon a blind allegiance to a political party or a particular dislike for her opponent – few real issues facing the nation are given as a reason to elect her. Add to that the fact that not many people really like her and some cannot stand her, yet her party stands behind her and fully supports her.
On the other hand, her opponent seems to have lost favor for any number of reasons with millions of people. He is claimed to be boorish, in possession of an over inflated ego, a bully, a loudmouth with few filters and most of all not a politician. No real accusations of wrongdoing have been leveled at him save for some women who claim he kissed them against their wishes and in a couple cases that he touched them inappropriately, yet his detractors claim he is dishonest and a fraud. If he is a fraud in some way, then he would have to also be considered a fool for entering this race. He has an exceptional amount of money, a wonderful family and the freedom to do as he pleases with relative anonymity, so why would he place himself in the position of running for president? It cannot be for the same reason as Hillary who, by the very definition of politician, is constantly concerned with retention of office, and advancement of personal power. It must be, then, that he really does care about America and would like to see it restored to the country many of us have known – the world’s strongest superpower – and a country and its leaders who command respect from all others. Has he made mistakes-absolutely. Has he said things better left unsaid-certainly. Has he broken laws or lied to the American people-absolutely not. However, his own party members, in many cases, have either stepped aside or even condemned him and will vote for someone else. Why? Simply because they do not like him or because they are afraid a political outsider will destroy their empire. His party has had control of Congress and the Senate for years, but has accomplished hardly anything. His party is guilty of protecting the re-election of its members, based upon political correctness, no matter the cost to the American people.
It should be obvious to anyone that neither party is truly worthy of representing the citizens of this country. Both have existed for years on controversy and have exhibited complete disregard for the will of constituents and have cast votes based upon adversarial party lines. Maybe, just maybe, it is time to elect someone not infected by political ambition – someone who doesn’t need the job and hasn’t lived off government and lobbyist payouts for years. It is a shame that Donald Trump has alienated many voters based upon personality, but the reality is there are only two choices for president and voters must determine what is truly important and cast their votes on more than personal likes and dislikes
The appointment of Supreme Court justices is likely the greatest issue facing the American citizens and will determine the future of America for decades to come. During debates, Donald Trump has used the term ”constitution” repeatedly when referring to likely appointees. Hillary Clinton, by contrast, has used that word only as an adjunct to her stance of appointing people in tune with today’s times and aware of the changes she claims need to be made in giving the federal government greater power. The approach to a justice appointment could not be more diametrically opposite, as expressed by the candidates, and the direction of this country, as guided and influenced by the Supreme Court, should be foremost in the minds of voters.
The dilemma comes where there are millions of people who would choose to do what their values direct, but wish to withhold their vote simply because they don’t “like” a candidate. Folks say repeatedly “I can’t vote for him because he is _____(fill in the blank)” while at the same time saying they want his party to rule this great nation and how much they wish another person had won the nomination. The fact is, millions of people determined Donald Trump is the nominee of the Republican Party and to turn from voting for him because their personal choice didn’t defeat him is rather a poor loser’s way of making a decision.
There is one chance for Americans to try to get the United States back on track in keeping with the constitution and limiting federal government control of everything. The dilemma must be overcome and people have to realize the importance of their vote in this election and determine to defeat a liberal candidate who would likely destroy our country as we know it.
Howie