When Donald Trump vowed this week to make child care more accessible and affordable, it was just the second time during his White House campaign that he's talked about an issue that affects millions of working Americans with young children.
The first came months ago in Iowa, when the eventual Republican nominee touted his own record as a business owner during a candidate Q&A, telling voters he provided on-site child-care service for his employees.
There is no evidence, however, that any such programs exist.
The billionaire real estate mogul, who previously voiced his opposition to government-funded universal pre-K programs, said in Newton, Iowa, in November 2015 that he had visited many companies that offered workers on-site child-care centers - and added that he offered such programs himself.
"You know, it's not expensive for a company to do it. You need one person or two people, and you need some blocks, and you need some swings and some toys," Trump said. "It's not an expensive thing, and I do it all over. And I get great people because of it. Because it's a problem with a lot of other companies."
Trump pointed specifically to two programs: "They call 'em Trump Kids. Another one calls it Trumpeteers, if you can believe it. I have 'em. I actually have 'em, because I have a lot of different businesses."
Trump went on to describe "a room that's a quarter of the size of this. And they have all sorts of - you know, it's beautiful - they have a lot of children there, and we take care of them. And the parent when they leave the job - usually in my case it's clubs or hotels - when they leave the job, they pick up their child and their child is totally safe."
"They even come in during the day during lunch to see their child. It really works out well," he said.
But the two programs Trump cited - "Trump Kids" and "Trumpeteers" - are programs catering to patrons of Trump's hotels and golf club. They are not for Trump's employees, according to staff at Trump's hotels and clubs across the country.
"Trump Kids" is described on the Trump Hotel Collection website as "a special travel program designed to help make your next family vacation a big hit." Its offerings include "kid-friendly amenities like kiddie cocktails, coloring books and no-tear bath amenities."
"The Trumpeteer Program" is described on the website of Trump National Golf Club in Charlotte, North Carolina, as "a program created specifically for our youngest members, ages three to twelve, which offers daily and evening child care, monthly newsletters and weekly events!"
When asked about on-site child care, employees at Trump's hotels and clubs across the country expressed confusion and explained the two programs are for guests and members only.
"No, there's no child care," said Maria Jaramillo, 36, a housekeeper at Trump International Hotel Las Vegas, where workers have been pushing Trump to sign a union contract.[...]
I entered University in 1972 at an elite school in perhaps the most liberal campus town in America. By that time the veterans of the Radical Student Movement were already graduate teaching assistants or newly minted Assistant Professors. My Professor for Psychology 101, a hippyish 33 year old Jewish UC Berkley PHD, opened the first lecture to approx. 500 freshmen with a discussion of the benefits of proper exercise of the pubococcygeus muscles for female students. There was a genuine hate for America and it values; it permeated the campus. In 1972, Hillary Clinton’s 92-page undergraduate senior thesis on the radical community organizer Saul Alinsky was a mere 3 years old. These individuals now form the nexus of the Democratic Party; they nurtured, and inculcated their values into students like Barak Obama, and now, the last of the Old Guard is ready to step up and lead what is left of the Free World. Obama promised to ‘transform America’, Hillary will continue the transformation, on steroids.
ReplyDeleteAs a pundit put it, “The people in charge of the transformation of this country have never liked this country the way it was founded. They have never appreciated it. They have resented it. They believe odd things about America. They believe it's the hotbed of racism and bigotry and homophobia, that America is the problem in the world. These are the people shaping this country. They are destroying every institution and tradition they can and remaking it. They have taken aim at our pop culture and our general culture and society at large, and they're having tremendous success in making right wrong and wrong right and turning everything upside down.
They have done a great job in convincing as many people as possible to believe there should be no limits on any kind of behavior and if you want to place limits you are the bigot. They have erased morality. They have erased the whole concept of moral authority. Nobody is allowed to have moral authority. Nobody is allowed to define right and wrong because such concepts cannot possibly be universal in their world.
Morality is individual choice now. You define it however you want to and what your definition is what is for you. And nobody has the right to come along and tell you otherwise. Well, this has led, it is leading to mass confusion. It is leading to the ripping up of roots and destroying the foundation of the greatest country that's ever been.
…It's about defeating the Democrat Party and what they stand for… That's what this has always been about to me. It's greater than my personal preferences over ideology and so forth. It's bigger to me than party.”
NeverTrump is a vote for Hillary. I cannot understand how an Orthodox Jew can support her.
This extensive screed would perhaps have a shred of legitimacy of the person running against Clinton represented any of the moral ideals this "pundit" believes in. In the real world, however, the Republican candidate is a repeat adulterer, made much of his fortune off of people's gambling addictions, and has said on many occasions that he never feels a need to ask forgiveness of anyone, let alone God. In addition, he has no substantially different position than she does on LGTB issues, and always professed to be pro-choice until he woke up and decided that he is a Republican. So why a vote for him is somehow upholding the great moral culture of America is beyond me. Is having your slogan be "Make America great Again" enough?
ReplyDeleteFirst, just to protect myself, I'll point out that maybe the article is wrong and it'll turn out that Mr. Trump does offer child care for employees at some locations.
ReplyDeleteNow my main point. Mr. Trump gets things wrong, either intentionally or not, in many cases. In some ways that is a strength in a political campaign in terms of getting elected. The medium of the media in some cases (TV, for example) is best suited for cartoonish presentations (cf. Rod McCluhan). We're dealing with sound bites, small screens like on a smartphone, etc. To get the message across may require exaggeration and distortion because of the nature of the media. In-depth, nuanced discussions aren't going to get much airplay.
So, if we are going to parse Mr. Trump's words and argue over them, we may be mixing Apples (iPhones) with oranges (sweet, juicy, logic arguments). Political campaigns are more like wars than professorial polemics. The first casualty in war is truth, they say.
That's why people outside the U.S. may be struggling with understanding the support for Mr. Trump. As Americans living in America, we "feel" what he is up to. We're in on it. It's not the way I would speak or act, but I've had enough contact with people in my life to get a handle on Mr. Trump's delivery.
"Lock her up! Lock her up! Lock her up!" they chant at the rallies. But wait, what about due process?! The presumption of innocence...? Phooey, on all that. For many of us, as Kish has pointed out, we're tired of the smugness of the liberals. I mean, if they had some achievements, it'd be easier to tolerate them. But they seem to have a record of virtually unrelieved failure.
I agree with you - that Trump is more suited to be a cartoon character or a stand up comedian than a president
ReplyDeleteIt's not the 'man' but the whole Gestalt that Trump represents, eg., the religious right, the military, the The 2nd Amendmenters, opposed to the radical Weltanschauung Clinton personifies; that's my point.
ReplyDeleteNot really sure why you are joining the liberal media in Trump bashing. And I do not think this is considered Daas Torah.
ReplyDeleteI would think all this lessens your credibility on your attacks on Kamenetskys, which I am in total agreement with you on that burning issue.
You haven't explained why Trump "represents" that "Gestalt."
ReplyDeleteWhat does he have to do with the religious right? What does he have to do with the military, other than saying "I know more about ISIS than the generals do"? And what do "the 2nd amendmenters" have to do with morality?
He represents them vis-à-vis their support for his campaign.
ReplyDeleteRegarding the 'religious right': their support was crucial for his primary win. I doubt he will betray them in any meaningful way
As a developer of Real Estate, Trump was reliant on contractors, the 'construction experts' to build his skyscrapers. To be a successful developer, one must be a master delegator. Trump would shudder at the thought that he knows more than his Generals. He says many times regarding ISIS, the we will find our General Patton; if he wants a patsy General, he wouldn't name George Patton.
Re: 2nd Amendmenters: Just a hunch, but I would guess that these individuals believe that there should be 'limits on behavior' and that Morality is something other than an 'individual choice'.
1: That is circular reasoning. You are essentially saying: "We should support him because he represents what we believe in, as evidenced by the fact that people who believe in those things support him"
ReplyDelete2: Trump disagrees with you. He is the one who claims that he knows more than the generals, not me.
3: My "hunch" is that for 2nd amendment people, their primary concern is (the totally false) belief that Clinton will somehow revoke the second amendment and take away their guns.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNY75rvcULY
ReplyDeleteJudge Pirro's opinion about the real criminals and some more proof of Comey's corruption.
Everything you and RDE say about DT is probably true. But everything LexAnEggs is saying about HC is also true.
ReplyDeleteSo who is more dangerous?
As Lox An Eggs said it very well Hillary represents an ideology. This ideology is wide spread and is bringing down this country and the entire Western world.
But here is what I believe should be at the center of our concerns. Who is more dangerous spiritually?
On a personal level someone who looks up to DT as a role model and leader personality is either being blind or has serious spiritual vacuum or a combination of the two.
However, in the wider picture Clinton represents an ideology that wants to seeks to up-route everything that we believe in. There will be more women in the army, homosexuality, trans sexual Z/He etc. Feminism will be nothing compared to what ever craziness they can come up with.
Clinton is of course more refined, tactful and ... dangerous!
She is more ideologically determined to bring the world to a lower level of decadence. Vote for the lesser of the two evils.
yes that is the question but the calculus is the question
ReplyDeleteFirst and foremost, the responsibility of the president is to try to ensure the safety of the country and the world at large. It is the opinion of many many experienced politicians, foreign affairs specialists, and military figures, who have served in both Republican and Democratic administrations, that Trump represents a very real danger in terms of security. His total lack of regard for whatever comes out of his mouth can lead the U.S. into major problems with both allies and enemies. His simple-minded worldview of seeing everything in terms of dollars and cents (e.g., not supporting NATO countries that have not "paid enough" into the system) can embolden Putin to invade other Baltic states. When asked why he responded in the debate to Rubio's crass comment, he said: He insulted me; I had no choice but to respond." Someone with that temperament with the military at his disposal is an outright danger. He has stated publicly that he is willing to use nuclear weapons against terrorists, which would open a Pandora's box that could literally put the world in danger.
ReplyDeleteSo, compared to that, I will take Clinton, even if it means that there will be more acceptance for LGBTQ people.
My point was that when it comes to media presentations, it can be good for a candidate to speak in broad generalizations, and to give strict truthfulness a back seat. That doesn't mean a candidate isn't interested in a high level carefully crafted agenda. What it means is that for the public to really tune in on that agenda, they have to dig a little: find out who is on the candidate's team. For example, if this blog is going to go political, it might be helpful to the readers to find out who is on Mr. Trump's economic team, national security team, etc. These are the men and women who will be advising Mr. Trump and actually implementing his policies.
ReplyDeleteMr. Trump has made no secret of his leadership style: hire the best people and give them the leeway to do their job.
Agreeing with me that politics in America as it plays out in the media is more entertainment than a discussion of substantive issues is simply recognizing what is obvious to most observers.
That is not to diminish the value of all the interviews, debates, armchair analysis, etc. It gives voters a chance to acquaint themselves with the people who will be ruling their country. But it's only a rough, first cut. To get the full movie takes a lot more work than casually browsing news websites.
where do you see that Trump listens to his advisors?!
ReplyDeleteThere is a growing feeling of queasiness in regards to Trump. Trump's broad generalization are not lack of precision and his true position is not ascertained by digging deeper. His recent statement regarding Obama and ISIS is a good example. He insisted after he made this shocking and clearly false statement that he meant it literally. He repeated this claim on several talk shows. Then he announced that he was only being sarcastic. But then he repeated the claim in Connecticut without indicating that he didn't mean it literally. He got no benefit from being coy as to whether he meant it literally - but he surely lost the votes of those who not only don't understand why he made such a statement but also don't know whether he meant it.
In short - the question regarding Trump is similar to the dilemma one gets when visiting a mental hospital and you are not really sure who the patients are and who are the staff members. Is the one you are talking to one of us - but just speaking in a more colorful manner - or are there screws loose and he is not to be trusted.
If I have no other choice I can deal with someone who is corrupt and lies to coverup up mistakes in a rational - but dishonest manner. But I can't deal with someone - and I surely don't want him running the country - if he is basically irrational with a surface appearance of competence. This concern seems to be that of the majority in this country who are questioning Trump's relationship with reality - not his policies.
I understand where your coming from, but I do not think you really understand what the LGBTQ issue really means and the full ramifications to the world we live in. And your right that it can strengthen Putin and weaken NATO. But you know what? I don't really care!!
ReplyDeleteBecause if it's Putin or Hillary, Do you know who I chose?
you would rather Putin get what he wants as long as Hillary isn't president?! Or are you saying you would vote for Putin over Hillary to be president of the USA?
ReplyDeleteAs far as the LGBTQ issue goes, Trump is not exactly a bible-thumping religious fanatic on that one. As far as can be told, he doesn't have much to say about it.
ReplyDeleteAs far as Hillary Clinton or Putin, if you would vote Putin, than I guess there isn't much to discuss.
If you give a choice between the 2 questions I will say yes to the second. But that is theoretical. The point is Russia is a world power and U.S is still considered a world power. I think Clinton is more dangerous to the world then Putin is. Putin has some positive refreshing elements that we can benefit from in the west.
ReplyDeleteClinton supporters are alarming us that Trump is working too well for Putin. I do not mind that so much. I like the fact that Trump and him get along.
Both candidates commit misstatements. The difference is how Trump's gaffes are played up while Hillary's are glossed over. Trump gets accused of things he never said (eg. He didn't say anything against the Khans, he merely questioned why the mother did not say anything. How was that "attacking" a "gold star family"?)
ReplyDeleteIs he really irrational or is that the way the media portrays him? I would think a woman whose mental process "short-circuits" is the one who is irrational.
ReplyDeleteAnd Hillary's plan to let in "refugees" like those who have committed rapes and murders in Europe is not out-rightly dangerous to the country? You talk about a possibility of what Trump "may" do. Hillary has said what she WILL do.
ReplyDeletewhere did she say she was letting them in without checking background?
ReplyDeletethe way the Republican party is inching away from Trump it is clear that he is viewed as irrational
ReplyDeleteHillary's are not glossed over as a brief perusal of the NY Times or the Washington Post will show you. Please don't be so naive - nobody else viewed it as innocent
ReplyDeletethe issue is why they are getting along
ReplyDeleteWhen you say that "Putin has some positive refreshing elements that we can benefit from in the west" do you mean like assassinating political opponents and journalists who write about his deeds? Or siphoning off many billions of dollars to his own bank accounts and those of his cronies?
ReplyDeleteMaybe because they both want to crack down on ISIS? Maybe Hillary's 'brilliant' foreign policy is more bothersome to Putin. Maybe other not such great reasons. But that is not the most burning issue.
ReplyDeleteNATO are not tzadikim. Putin is chummy with Iran but Hillary won't be any better for Israel on that issue anyhow.
I repeat I do not care if Russia gets stronger at this point. I see the number 1 enemy as the spiritual decadence of the west. LGBTQ issues are handled much better by Putin as far as i'm concerned.
So call me crazy, but who said Democracy is always better than Autocracy? Who said the world is so much safer if America won't get along with Russia?
The ones inching away are the same ones who rolled over for Obama. Why do you think Trump won in the primaries? Because most of us Republicans (I have been registered Republican since I was old enough to vote) are disgusted with the way the "professional" politicians have failed to follow the will of the people.
ReplyDeleteOh please. Just doing a text search on the Politics page of the NYT shows 73 hits for Trump vs. 47 hits for Clinton. You are being naive if you don't think there isn't a liberal media bias against Trump. And unfortunately so far it has been working. Just like the way the media makes a big deal every time a Negro is killed by a police officer (even when completely justified) thereby feeding the anti-police sentiments.
ReplyDeleteWhere did she say she was and how?
ReplyDeletewhere did you see that she is removing the present controls ?
ReplyDeleteyour statistics are meaningless. It assume that both candidates produce the same number of problematic statements or actions but that Trump is twice as likely to be reported as Clinton. The fact is that Trump produces at least twice as many interesting statements and thus he is reported twice as often as Clinton. This was his deliberate strategy and he won the nomination with the attention he got that was displaced from all his competition.
ReplyDeleteHe is insistomg on maintaining the same strategy in his run for the presidency - but it clearly isn't working and his advisors keep telling him that but he won't listen.
nope - it is clearly people who want Trump president and can't stand Clinton - but can't deal with the way he is handling himself in the presidential campaign. He is just too much of an embarrassment.
ReplyDeletewe are not talking about getting along with Russia. Putin doesn't act friendly just because he wants to be friends - don't be naive. Sounds like you would be happy to live under Russian domination because they have a better policy about homosexuals? or perhaps you would prefer Saudia Arabia?
ReplyDeleteyes why is corruption ok for Putin but you can't stand it in Hillary. Biased against women?
ReplyDeleteWhat present controls?
ReplyDeleteDid you listen to him today? Make sure to listen to him on Hannity tomorrow.
ReplyDeleteIt's not just what he says. Hillary's corrupt practices are not being given the same attention as would be if a Republican had committed them.
ReplyDeleteHow do you come up with that? The RINOs are people who are not interested in Trump becoming President even if he were to not say a single word that could be twisted. They are "professional" politicians who don't see Trump as one of them but do see Hillary as such.
ReplyDeletenot so
ReplyDeleteTrump's buildings -- actual buildings -- are standing. That's because after he pouts the deals together to build the buildings, the engineers, architects, steelworkers, plumbers, etc. get to work and put it up. That's the way I think he'll run his administration. Hire qualified people. How did he decide who to hire for his current team? He apparently spoke to knowledgeable people he trusted and took advice for whom to hire.
ReplyDeleteIt is no stretch to call Hillary Clinton "co-founder" of ISIS. Another term might be "silent partner". If I'm not mistaken, Ms. Clinton was a PLO supporter from way back when the whole world considered them terrorists. Ms. Clinton is one of the most qualified candidates for president ever. As a governor's wife, as First Lady, as a U.S. Senator and as Secretary of State she has learned how government works. She and her husband will continue their seemingly serendipitous but actually methodical plans to dismantle the State of Israel. Maybe that's a good thing from the perspective of Jewish history. I'm not sure. But I am sure that I am opposed to it. Because it will lead to Jews getting hurt.
So I'm sticking with Mr. Trump.
Saudi Arabia is one place and Russia is another. Putin is accommodating to the Jews who live in his country. You can't accuse him of antisemitism.
ReplyDeleteAs long as he lets me learn Torah and keep Mitzvos and he's not even discriminating against me and he works to decrease antisemitism in his country that's excellent. Antisemitism in Russia is in decline (although it's probably still strong their, but that is years of history and not related to Putin's leadership) and in the West it's is escalating. The more liberal the country is the more antisemitism is growing.
We are Americans and were used to the fact that democracy is good for the Jews and dictatorships are bad. That definitely was true for a while, but it's not a given. Reality around us is changing and we should learn to think out of the box.
Rav Avigdor Miller a"h is known to have said that he would even vote for an antisemite if he was the better candidate on the moral issues.
No genius I was not referring to that aspect. But, relating to those issues: yes, he is a dictator. This is the way dictatorships work. It is not pretty. But when cha"zal were speaking about Mispalel be'shloma shel Malchus and MOROUH shel malchus as a necessity, it was pretty much these type of dictatorships.
ReplyDeleteObviously democracy has its advantages, but what you don't seem to get is that it also has it's downsides and were getting closer to the point where things are getting out of control and the downside is outweighing the advantages.
yes sounds familiar - "society is getting out of control - call in the dictator"
ReplyDelete