Good

this holiday season, I’m sure that all Americans want to receive pretty much the same gift. Answers. In around the world of politics, everyone is wondering what their country and the world are going to look like after January 20, once President Trump, the sequel is released, or, depending on your perspective, unleashed. What can we expect to see up on the big screen? What’s coming Cue music from Jaws, or maybe the sound of music? When he took office, incoming President George H W Bush promised to forge an administration that was kinder and gentler than some of the meism we saw at the Reagan Revolution. Of course, no one in his right mind expects anything even remotely kind or gentle from Trump. He doesn’t have it in him. By it, I mean character, among other things. About a year ago, I recorded a video for straight arrow news where I spelled out a laundry list of values and human qualities that Trump lacks. The lists include items like wisdom, introspection,

courage, smarts, empathy, compassion, common sense, humility, loyalty and good judgment,

did Trump learn anything from his first tour of duty in the Oval Office, or did he learn anything after leaving office from being hounded, indicted, tried, convicted and nearly assassinated? If he did, now is the time to show it off,

sure the incoming president could take the win and be a bigger man than his critics expect him to be, but that’s a long shot. A safer bet is that the 47th president, who bears a striking resemblance to the 45th president, will be every bit as vindictive and petty as some political observers fear.

Trump is massively insecure, haunted by ghosts and tied down by past lives. He never forgets a slight and he enjoys nothing more than humiliating his opponents by making them grovel and beg for his approval. Yet, is it really that simple and predictable? Will Trump 2.0

just be meaner and more embittered than the original, is that all there is to it, let’s hope not. I, for one, think it’s possible that Trump has grown up quite a bit, and the experience of having been present before could help him become a better president this time around. After all, he’s already done this job.

Some Americans say he did it well. Others insist he did it poorly. We could argue about that until the end of time, but he did the job just the same. He doesn’t need training wheels. He can hit the ground running. Hopefully he’ll learn from his mistakes and not repeat them, at least that’s the feeling I got recently when I saw news footage of Trump in Paris for the ceremony marking the reopening of Notre Dame Cathedral, as he was greeted warmly by French president Emmanuel Macron, Trump seemed perfectly comfortable in the role in which history has cast him now twice that of leader of the free world. It’s very strange to many Americans, Trump is a clown, a con man, a carnival barker. He’s given at least half the country permission to hate, resent and distrust the other half. He has made our country more mean, more divided, more unsure of its place in the world. And yet, when he’s abroad, it’s a totally different story. Macron likely saw an old friend, an ally, someone who he knew he could work with because he had worked with him before. That sort of thing has value. Let’s hope that Trump doesn’t screw it up with his America first bravado and his disdain for NATO. And while we’re at it, let’s hope something else that Trump 2.0 the sequel is much better than the original. I.

All right, listen, this time around, another resistance to Trump is simply not going to cut it. I don’t say this because the first term resistance didn’t succeed in many ways it did, but it’s because Republicans and Maga and trumpists have something much bigger up their sleeve this time around. Let me remind you. Back in 2016 when Trump was elected, we saw the resistance emerge, and this included resist bumper stickers, social media, posts, etc, and basically it was probably millions of Americans getting off the sidelines, pushing back against an extreme and chaotic agenda. And the thinking then was, if we can hold Trump off for four years, we can restore normalcy. Let’s endure this chapter, and then the country will come to its senses, and things will go back to normal. And to a degree, it did succeed. The resistance during Trump’s first term, protected the Affordable Care Act from being gutted. It built a legal and civic infrastructure that took Trump to court and won some battles. It energized candidates in 2018

and it played a role in defeating Trump in 2020 the resistance that started in 2016 to a degree can be thanked for defeating Trump in 2020 and Joe Biden being a more normal president for four years. But here’s the thing that you have to understand, when Trump was defeated in 2020 Republicans didn’t just sit around complaining. They built, they created a media ecosystem ideological outfits. They nurtured a generation of right wing influencers. They were taking electoral hits, no doubt, but they were planning for a future Trump government and more enduring change that will outlast Donald Trump. They created Project 2025 which is going to shape the government into something far more radical and right wing when Trump takes power. So notice that when Biden won, Maga didn’t just resist, they set their sights way higher into an enduring opposition, and that’s what the left needs to do now, because we are not facing the same sort of Trump term that we faced in 2017 when Trump was sworn in in January. We are now facing a Trump that has no elections left to run, according to some, is setting up JD Vance and his own son, Don Jr, to run alongside JD in 2028 they want to reshape bureaucratic institutions in their image. So we need something more durable and more forward looking that I would call an opposition, not a resistance. Mark Elias laid out the components, and they are all really important. One you have to win elections. The campaigning has to improve.

Democrats aren’t the best at campaigning. There were a number of mistakes, missteps during the Harris campaign. Don’t put limitations on yourself. Protect democracy. Play to win, not play nice. You’ve got to win some elections. That means 2026, for sure. Second, the 10 does need to be bigger. And I’m not talking about we welcome hateful white supremacist or this sort of thing. But one of the things that happened during successful left wing movements, including the New Deal era, is there were core ideas which most people were behind. But there were people who wanted to go further than those core ideas, but they still participated because they knew those core ideas are a great next step. There were people who didn’t like every single one of those core ideas, but they liked enough of them to say, I’m also participating. And everybody was welcomed. So we don’t want litmus tests. We don’t want purity tests. We need to grow the 10. Number three, we must invest in institutions that will support this opposition. Conservatives have spent decades doing it. They’ve got the daily wire with investors. Turning Point USA, the Heritage Foundation, which now has built project 2025 imagine a think tank develops the paper that becomes the framework for how they are going to govern. We need that. We don’t really have it. Number four, the communication strategy needs to be completely overhauled. The lying on the elite media outlets to reach a tiny, shrinking audience. It’s not going to work. The right had this ecosystem of podcasts and interviews. This isn’t me saying Kamala would have won if she did. Rogan, No, it wouldn’t have made a difference. But we need a year in and year out left wing ecosystem. It’s not just about relevance and reach. It’s about much more than that, and it’s creating an enduring ecosystem. And then number five, the left needs to use the courts as unabashedly as Trump uses the courts. Trump will use the courts however he can to get out of trouble, to get policy done, to accomplish all sorts of different legislative goals. On the left were often more hesitant because we say, I don’t know if that’s right. I’m just not sure. I don’t know about that.

We’ve got to do it. We cannot disarm when they have tools they are willing to use. We need to use them as well. This is an opposition. This is not resistance. Hashtag resist. This is something bigger. It’s necessary, and I’m going to lay out more particulars of how to achieve it in future videos. Let me know what you think you.

Happy Holidays. All right, listen, nobody’s trying to take Christmas away. I’m thankful for the holidays. I’m thankful for the time to reflect, for the time to honor

and for the time to enjoy family. But let’s be very clear about what the holidays really means to corporate America,

it is a fat paycheck to pressure you, to coerce you, to trick you, to beguile you into purchasing, purchasing, purchasing. A lot of pressure happens during this time of year. As a matter of fact,

the height of depression takes place during the holidays. How is that

it’s supposed to be so cheery? Yeah, it is. But we got away from it. We got away from the idea of what it it should be about,

it’s for corporate America. It should be about family, connection, friends, fun, laughs, right? This is why I challenge the narrative about capitalism, unchecked capitalism, at that corporate greed.

Manipulation of markets

and individuals like you and I, we are left holding the bag literally.

So when we talk about a capitalistic society, understand nuances required to make it the best society possible,

pure capitalism looks like hell. It does. You have usury. You have children working in factories unsafe conditions. You have no union protections. You have no protection of minors, you do not get a fair wage at all, no minimum wage requirement, and companies are able to do basically what they please, because you have no rights. So nobody wants to uncheck capitalism. Even if you say you are for capitalism, you’re also for Social Security, right? That’s a social program. You’re also for public education, right? Another social program. There’s no constitutional mandate that says the government must provide a public school option. These are social programs that we have accepted and we have come to love about our nation.

My point is this,

let us figure out a way forward that allows for more nuanced conversation. As it relates to capitalism, yes, but also as it relates to how do you make capitalism work inside of a country where capitalism hasn’t really worked. Because last time I checked, a whole lot of folk are still trying to figure out how to make ends meet. Capitalism has not been the great Savior that individuals at the top of that food chain said it would be.

So let’s have an adult conversation. Go and get to 2025, and beyond. I.

Alright, so with a month left to go before the inauguration, Trump just held his first formal press conference as President Elect. He met with reporters at Mar-A-Lago alongside the co-lead of his transition team, SoftBank Group CEO Masayoshi Son, and his Commerce Secretary pick Howard Lutnik. The overarching goal was to announce a planned $100 billion investment by SoftBank in AI technology, but Trump covered a whole lot more.

How’d it go? Let’s talk takeaways.

First, Trump has been taking a lot of heat for picking RFK Jr. as his Health and Human Services Secretary, mostly because RFK Jr…doesn’t believe in vaccines. Which is a problem for a Health and Human Services Secretary.

Because I cannot help myself: There has been no evidence of a link between vaccines and autism; the increase in autism rates among US children has been attributed to increased awareness and screening. But sure, let’s bring back polio. Make America iron lung-y again!

Anyway, Trump said…well, not much of substance. He said he doesn’t like vaccine mandates, but he does like the polio vaccine…and…I don’t know. I don’t think he knows what he’s talking about in this regard, or really cares.

Lara Trump was also a subject of conversation, because sure. Will Ron Desantis appoint Trump’s daughter-in-law to the Senate after Marco Rubio heads off to be Secretary of State?

Yes, I’m sure Lara Trump, clearly a super judge of character – she is married to Eric, after all – is naturally suited to the United States Senate. It has nothing to do with Trump. We’re not cementing a family dynasty. Nothing to see here, folks!

Moving on.

For some reason, we spent time talking about the drones hovering over New Jersey, because that seems like the central issue of our time. Trump also talked tariffs, which again I do not think he really understands. And look, I don’t really, either, but I’m also not the president of the united states.

For a last hurrah, he went on about how great China – and the Chinese President – are.

Praising dictators, shoving yet more family members into the political arena, and saying not much at all of substance. Business as usual for the next four years.

As the holiday season rolls on, we’re all familiar with the frenzy flashy sales, viral gift guides, pressure to spend, spend, spend, whether it’s splurging on the latest tech gadget, decking out our homes in extravagant decor, or buying more toys than we really know what to do with. Well, the holidays have become a time when consumer culture peaks, but for all the joy and goodwill the season brings, it also highlights a painful truth, the economic inequality that defines our society is even more pronounced during these weeks of spending madness for many, the holidays are just a reminder of just how far they fall behind in a system that encourages materialism and excess. The truth is, holiday consumerism doesn’t just hurt our bank accounts, it exacerbates the very economic disparities that already exist in our communities. A 2023 report from the National Retail Federation showed that Americans were expected to spend over 900 billion on holiday gifts alone. While that figure may sound impressive, it also underscores how much wealth is concentrated in the hands of a few. The top 10% of US earners hold nearly 70% of the country’s wealth, while millions of others struggle to make ends meet for those living paycheck to paycheck, the holidays become a time of stress, not celebration. It’s hard to enjoy the season when you’re worrying about paying for basic necessities, let alone splurging on a fancy gift or a lavish meal. For marginalized communities in particular, the impact of this consumer driven holiday culture is even more profound. According to the Economic Policy Institute, black families in the United States have a median wealth of just $24,000

compared to $188,000

for white families. This Stark disparity means that for many people of color, the pressure to keep up with the holiday spending is not just financial, it’s deeply personal. The expectation to purchase expensive gifts or attend lavish parties can perpetuate feelings of inadequacy and reinforce the notion that material wealth equals worth. Our culture of consumption disproportionately burdens low income families who are already contending with higher costs for housing, education, and do not even get me started on health care. But it’s not just about the financial strain. The constant bombardment of ads and social media posts during the holidays sends a dangerous message that the holidays are about what you can buy, not what you can give in terms of love, time or meaningful connection for those already marginalized by systemic inequality. This reinforces the false narrative that happiness and success can only be achieved through material goods. It diverts our attention away from the deeper, more meaningful aspects of the season, like community solidarity and care for one another. We, the people, deserve a holiday season that celebrates connection over consumption rather than falling victim to the pressures of consumer culture. We must shift our focus to what truly matters, collective well being. We can start by rethinking our approach to holiday gifting instead of expensive presence, let’s prioritize experiences, shared meals, time spent with loved ones and efforts to support small businesses or local artisans. We can also use this season to give back to those in need by contributing to food banks, supporting community organizations, or simply offering our time to those less fortunate. The truth is, we can fight economic inequality without waiting for legislative change. Every dollar we spend or we choose to spend with intention, every gift we give that comes from the heart rather than from the wallet, every effort we make to support marginalized communities is an act of resistance against the consumer driven machine that really just seeks to divide us. The holidays can be a time of joy and solidarity. Let’s make them just that. It’s time to rethink what truly defines a meaningful holiday season, and in doing so, we can help create a more equitable world for everyone. Happy holidays. You.

look, no one ever claimed that the two major political parties are exceptionally skilled at learning from their mistakes or even admitting that they made mistakes in the first place. So it’s no surprise that several weeks after the November 5 presidential election, both Republicans and Democrats seem poised to learn all the wrong lessons, which will, of course, lead them down a path where they will make a whole new series of mistakes that they will deny making. Oh, good. Just what we need, more cases of political malpractice by party, people who like to pretend they’re serving the public when they’re really just benefiting themselves. But before the lessons comes the autopsy. As time passed, political observers reached a variety of conclusions about why Donald Trump won so decisively and why Kamala Harris lost so definitively. We’ve heard that Trump connected with voters, took risks, zeroed in on inflation and immigration as top concerns ventured outside. Mainstream media took advantage of his opponent’s mistakes, used his resources wisely, fully embraced the performative aspect of running for president and conveyed a simple vision of what he’d do if elected. We’ve heard that Trump didn’t write off a single voter because he really seemed to believe that every voting demographic was in play, and that he ignored the advice of strategists, aides and consultants, and just trusted his own instincts. He knew what voters wanted, and he served it up to them at a McDonald’s drive through in Pennsylvania. We’ve also heard that Harris did none of those things, no connecting, no communicating well, no risk taking, no venturing outside her perceived safe spaces, no exploiting Trump’s mistakes, no vision, simple enough to fit on a cocktail napkin. We’ve heard that Harris was a terrible candidate who ran a subpar campaign that tried to be about everything, so it wound up being about nothing. Harris made a terrible blunder in ducking tough interviews, for instance, and skipping events that could have been problematic or embarrassing, like appearing on the Joe Rogan podcast, or attending a conference of Black Journalists or participating in a Univision Town Hall aimed at Latinos. Trump did all of that. Harris did none of that during the campaign, Democrats were lazy when they assumed that all they needed to do was point out how terrible Trump was and then shame everyone who was even thinking of voting for him, hoping they think again now that the election is over, Democrats are being lazy again when they refuse to be introspective and take responsibility for the loss, and instead shift the blame to black men, white women, rural voters, young people, Latinos and anyone else out there who didn’t turn out to vote for Harris, which is a lot of people. As for the lessons here are the proper ones to draw. Republicans should learn not to overreach. They should not conclude that just because 25% of black men and nearly half 46% of Latinos voted for Trump, that going forward, those same percentages will defect again in future presidential elections to vote for whatever bonehead candidate the Republican Party nominates. This was lightning in a bottle, and the bottle had a very distinct name on it, Trump. Meanwhile, Democrats should learn to accept that the American people have agency. They’re free to make their own choices about who to vote for, and it’s up to the parties to give those people quality picks from which to choose. Also, if you want to win over voters in the next election, maybe you should ratchet down the arrogance and not criticize them for how they voted in this one. Personally, as a centrist who despises both political parties equally, I usually can’t tell them apart. Often they say they believe in different things, but when it comes down to getting and keeping power, they behave the exact same way that is always and forever in their own self interest. 

It’s time to face a mathematical reality. If the incoming Trump administration really wants to cut the $2.5

trillion that they’ve said they want to cut, you either need to cut all discretionary spending, not going to happen, or you need to start cutting from Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. How do we know this? Because of second grade arithmetic, let me explain. And first, let me back up a little bit recently, giga billionaire Elon Musk met on Capitol Hill with Republican senators who, on average, are millionaires, so top level the people that are going to figure out what to cut mostly from Americans with middle class salaries and income and net worths. Mostly it’s going to be an unelected bureaucrat named Elon Musk, who hasn’t won anything, and who has hundreds of billions of dollars working in concert with millionaire Republicans. Fine, that’s where we are starting. The average Social Security benefit is $1,700

per month, and when they came out of that meeting, Republicans and Fox News reported it, everything is on the table. Nothing is sacrosanct. Was the phraseology that they used, meaning we would consider, do we make cuts to Medicare? Do we make cuts to Medicaid? Do we make cuts to Social Security? Now, some were surprised by this, and I’ve been talking extensively about how there are a lot of people who voted for Trump who are about to get crushed and punished, and it’s going to happen more to those red state Trump voters than than anybody else. I’ll explain why Trump is, again, said I’d like to get rid of Obamacare, all right. Well, a lot of blue states have health care exchanges so that everybody, regardless of ability to pay, can get health care if Obamacare goes away. If you live in California or Connecticut or Massachusetts or New York, they have state exchanges. It’s not really going to make a difference for you, those states have done the Medicaid expansion. They’re good. However, if you live in a red state that does not have its own health care exchange, has not done the Medicaid expansion, if Trump succeeds, and Maga Mike Johnson said, we’re going to try to get rid of Obamacare. If they succeed, it’s the red state voters that will quickly find themselves without health care and without the ability to afford care that they might need. Similarly, similarly when it comes to this social security safety net thing, it is going to overwhelmingly impact a lot of these rural, lower and lower middle class Trump voters in red states who said, Yeah, we like Trump. And now the math of it points to Social Security cuts. Now let’s get back to the math of it. The budget has three major components. It has mandatory spending, which is stuff we’re committed to spend Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid. It has discretionary spending, a whole bunch of other programs, and then we have interest on debt. Those are the three components. The interest on the debt you have to pay. You can negotiate pauses, etc, but you’re not going to just cut it. You can’t just say we don’t owe anybody any money anymore, as Republicans often like to remind us, the discretionary part of the annual budget is 2.5 trillion. My math tells me that if you want to cut 2.5 trillion and the discretionary budget is 2.5 trillion, that means that unless you touch mandatory spending like Social Security, you must cut 100%

of discretionary spending, that’s not a serious proposal. And so where that leaves us mathematically is that if you’re surprised to be hearing Republicans now say we’re going to consider social security, nothing is sacrosanct. We’re thinking about it. If you’re surprised to be hearing that, it’s because you didn’t do simple second grade arithmetic, which is to say, can they get 2.5 trillion without touching Social Security only if they cut all of it? And they’re not going to cut all of it, because it’s a country and it has stuff it needs to spend money on. I guess it’s coming out of Social Security. Now, if you’re hearing this and getting immediately worried, I can give you a couple of optimistic words. Number one, hopefully Trump will fail, right? I mean, that’s one aspect. Hopefully it’s not actually going to succeed at happening, because Republicans are going to say, Wait a second, we will all lose re election if we actually start cutting Social Security. That’s number one. Number two, and this is a small saving grace. It.

May only affect people who aren’t yet receiving benefits. So what the way they may do it, if they do is that if you’re already retired and receiving benefits, your benefits don’t change, but if you’re currently paying into the system, you’re what you can expect to get is going to decline. It’s not really a saving grace, but at least you would have a little more time to plan for it. It’s a disaster. It’s a disaster, but this is what they voted for, and this is what they’re going to get so.

Yeah, okay. Is it time to have a serious conversation about qualifications? I remember during the previous election where Republicans, in particular, Maga, they made a big deal about the qualifications of one Kamala Harris, Vice President of the United States, former US senator, former Attorney General, State of California, et cetera, et cetera. But now Trump is appointing individuals, at least echoing these appointments publicly that he’s going to appoint people who are completely, completely not qualified to do the job. You have individuals who have no idea how to run an educational department being named as Trump’s pick for the Department of Education, and the list goes on and on and on. So what do you have here? What’s the common thread? There’s two. Actually. One common thread is that these individuals are either a rich and they contributed a lot of money to Trump’s campaign, or be really, really loyal to Donald Trump as a cult leader, basically, and would do whatever he says. Now there’s conversations about, should Biden pardon Trump, because it would speak to some level of unity within the political ranks. Hell no, he should not pardon Trump. One, Trump doesn’t need it. Okay, Trump will be in charge of the Department of Justice, period. They can just drop the case. Number two, he likely was simply pardon himself. If that wasn’t doable with the DOJ, which, by the way, I’m sure they would do it for him, and he’s the kind of President, when he gets into office, he’s going to not simply push, not simply pull, but shred the separations of power as it relates to the United States of America. Now, with all of these appointments, either being wealthy and made major contributions or being individuals who do not will not and cannot challenge the incoming president of the United States, Donald Trump, do you believe that you win in that scenario? You see sometimes leadership requires challenge. Leadership is not always about who you are able to motivate. Sometimes leadership is about who you are willing to offend when required. Here’s what we know for a fact, if you’re not rich and if you don’t have this UN checked loyalty to Donald Trump, you’re not his friend. This is how the oligarchy take control. This is how democracy becomes less of a democracy. This is how a country starts to show its true colors. In that equation, you and I become less of a factor in the overall process of our policies, and that is the scary part

The list of potentially problematic and hard-to-undo policies that are starting to trickle out of the next Trump administration is vast, but for today let’s focus on one that hits especially close to home for those of who might find Putin’s jail-your-enemies strategy less-than-ideal. 

Donald Trump has never made any bones about his desire for retribution against those who publicly disagree with him. Over and over and over again, he has spoken of his desire to see everyone from Hilary Clinton to Nancy Pelosi to Liz Cheney “locked up.” He repeated this intention over the weekend, on NBC’s Meet the Press.

TRUMP:

Scary stuff. Because soon, he will have the means to do…more or less what he wants. And – in true Trump fashion – he won’t even have to do it himself. Because, see, Trump has tapped former Defense Department official and hard-line MAGA loyalist Kash Patel to be the Director of the FBI. 

Kash Patel, to refresh your memory, is the author of a book called “Government Gangsters” that calls for a “comprehensive housecleaning” of the Justice Department by prosecuting to the, quote “fullest extent of the law” anyone who “in any way abused their authority for political ends.” Trump has said that this book will be used as a “roadmap” for the new administration. 

Patel has made a list – an actual list – of people whom he believes should be jailed, and it includes a lot of people who are guilty only of refusing to bend the knee to Trump. 

It’s entirely possible that Biden will have issued blanket pardons to some of the names on Patel’s list by the time this goes to air – and this is an issue on which Biden very literally cannot win. Because of course, by pardoning these members of Congress what gets through to the general, non-political-junkie public is a reinforcement of the corruption of government, and a belief that they must have done something wrong to receive pardons. 

They did not. These are innocent people in danger of serious political persecution, and Biden absolutely has a responsibility – an imperative, even – to ensure their safety.

Trump has said – out loud, over and over – what he is going to do, and nothing that he has done since the election has brought any of that into question. And now Trump is installing a loyalist who has no compunction against weaponizing the government as a tool of retribution…at the FBI. The question as to whether our intelligence agencies will be able to retain standards of professionalism and apolitical intent is an increasingly fraught one. 

I’m going with no, they won’t. They will become arms of the Trump revenge machine, and with just over a month before unthinkable policy after unthinkable policy starts being put into place, this is Biden’s chance to do whatever he can. 

I hate this, to be clear. This is some crazy-making stuff, the idea that our next president will be someone who tried to overthrow the government and then will try to toss those who spoke out against him in jail, but again: here we are.

The fatal shooting of United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson last week captured national attention, not only because of the brazen nature of the act itself, but also because of the wild public reaction. Now, while violence is rarely ever justified, the online schodenford, the dark humor, the anger, the frustration it all underscores a deeper truth, Americans are furious with a health care system that too often treats them as profit margins rather than actual people and the numbers they do not lie. Over 100 million Americans are in medical debt, many because of astronomical deductibles and denied claims. According to a Kaiser Family Foundation report, 41% of working age adults have skipped medical care due to cost, and over 60% of all personal bankruptcies in the US while they’re tired to medical bills. These are not isolated incidents. They are a collective cry for help from a system that prioritizes shareholder returns over patient care, although we don’t necessarily have confirmation yet of the motive. Brian Thompson’s death is a sobering moment, but the response well, it points to a far reaching irony. Well, corporations like meta spend upwards of 24 million annually on personal security for their CEOs and executives. Millions of Americans are well. They’re fighting insurance companies over life saving treatments. Thompson himself led a division with 281 billion in revenue last year. Yet one in six claims in the US were unjustly denied. According to the American Medical Association, these denials often come with devastating consequences for individuals. I’m talking about delayed care, worsening illnesses, and in some cases, even premature death. This is hyper capitalism at its worst, when profits are prioritized above all else. Trust breaks down, and we, the people, are not blind to this imbalance. We see the multi million dollar compensation packages, these sprawling executive retreats, the stock buybacks, and we also see families crowdfunding medical expenses on GoFundMe. It’s no wonder anger has reached a boiling point. Yet rather than addressing this anger with meaningful reform, well, companies seem to be doubling down in the wake of Thompson shooting, some corporations responded by scrambling to scrub executive photos and biographies from websites as if Invisibility is the solution, and others rushed to hire more private security. But here’s the truth, a $250,000

a year security detail will not fix the rot of our health care system. What will reform? Reform that puts patients first, reform that reins in the $1 trillion spent annually on administrative health care costs more than any other nation. Reform that bans the practice of denying care for profit, Medicare for all, for example. That’s one solution, but even incremental steps like stronger regulations on insurance claims and caps on out of pocket cost, well, those things could be transformative, and let’s not forget the human side of this crisis. Behind every stat is a story a mother forced to choose between chemotherapy and rent, the child denied a wheelchair because of insufficient medical necessity, the elderly couple drowning in debt because one had a stroke. These are not isolated tragedies. They are systemic failures as Americans, we must demand better. Call our representatives push for policies that bring accountability to the insurance industry, join movements advocating for universal health care. We can no longer afford to let the system exploit our lives and our wallets a better health care system is not a pipe dream. It’s a necessity. If we fail to act, we risk not only the health of our nation, but also the very fabric of our society. The path forward starts with reclaiming health care as a public good. Now, while I cannot promise that this approach will protect CEOs from violence, I can assure you that it would give them less cause to fear.