Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
I've been a reader of Ed Montini's columns for 20 years or more. Most always agree with him but not this time! Letting Nixon away with a pardon set up the corruption we have today. Not that making those accountable will completely stop these actions, but letting the crooks run free certainly leaves the door open for much more.
Saying or even typing its name can cause gagging, The Former Guy.
You keep saying no one give a shit about TFG. Actually there are quite a few of us who do care. If this corruption is not stopped by punishment it only says the next ones can get away with even more. I'm fairly sure most everyone on this board knows that already.
You stated the article is from Washington Post.
Link you provided goes to Washington Examiner.
There are differences between the two.
Your reply wasn't exactly what I was drifting towards, suppose I should have been more specific.
Previously you had said only land owners should be allowed to vote, now is house owners. Would you include owners of condos or apartments too?
As I never any desire for a tattoo I wasn't aware of the cost, thanks for informing me they can be as expensive as a home.
Interesting proposition you make with only land owners are eligible to vote. Can you lease explain you rational behind it and exactly how that would work.
I just thought of specific group which in-person voting can be problematic, long haul truckers. Is estimated there are between 300,000 and 500,000 in the USA. Years ago I was one of them zigzagging coast to coast and back, many times away from home a month at a time. I'm sure there are many other professions who work out of state or simply far away from home for extended periods. They could also have difficulties returning to their home polling place.
I should have this on my list too:
6) Early voting. (Preferably for everyone but at least for those with a valid reason).
OK, you want only in-person voting so only healthy people can vote. How do you feel about five accommodations so everyone except invalids can vote?
1) Make voting day on Saturday and/or Sunday.
2) Make voting day a national holiday.
3) No employers can require employees to work on voting day.
4) Enough polling locations so those without a vehicle can walk to vote.
5) Enough polling locations so no-one should have more than a five minute wait period.
I see the guy who pushes the slogan yet couldn't explain what 'Freedom over Fear' means, has returned.
Seems to me the GOP has been pushing fear for as long as I can remember.
Fear of brown people
Fear of black people
Fear of asian people
Fear of liberal people
Fear of LGBTQ people
Fear of education
Fear of democracy
Actually, fear of everything except white evangelical christians, Russia and viruses that can kill you.
I asked you what "freedom over fear" means because I don't know. Please enlighten me.
"Freedom over fear" seems quite vague, could you explain exactly what that means?
If Trumps history is the guide the answer is no-one. Just run up all the bills, refuse to pay contractors, steal what you can, declare bankruptcy then tie up in courts for as long as possible never admitting any wrongdoing.
Some people are happy when they see everyones lives improve, others are only happy when they see their perceived enemies are harmed or killed.
Well said zab.
Glad to see you back!
Power, money and control is all that matters.
Except for the fact that the republican party really wants to get rid of social security. Every time they chip away at it the end goal becomes a bit closer.
Politico writer Jake Sherman reports on bailout bill. Amongst numerous democratic objections is this gem.
This time its pg 391, section 417, which allows the government to keep private for six months loans it makes to entities.
https://twitter.com/JakeSherman
Anyone else suspect this is written to hide funds given to Trump properties?
For those of us familiar with Trump's history is no surprise that he is again using other peoples money to benefit himself. In this case is taxpayers dollars to buy votes.
He also has a history of trampling the underprivileged so there is nothing unusual in his Agriculture Department is appealing a judge's ruling that cutting food stamps during a pandemic is wrong.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/health/usda-fights-to-purge-food-stamps-recipients-despite-pandemic
And yet his supporters still chant "Lock Her Up".
Reminds me of the old meme,
"Trump said that if I voted for Clinton I'd be stuck with a criminal president under constant federal investigation from day one".
Turns out he was right.
I voted for Clinton and I've been stuck with a criminal president under federal investigation since day one.
Thanks for posting as I didn't see any mention on the regular sites I visit.
For those who missed is well worth watching even if you have ready the obstruction part of the Mueller report. For me the actors brought this to life in a way quietly reading myself did not.
https://lawworksaction.org/
A DAY IN THE LIFE OF JOE REPUBLICAN
Joe gets up at 6 a.m. and fills his coffeepot with water to prepare his morning coffee. The water is clean and good because some tree-hugging liberal fought for minimum water-quality standards. With his first swallow of coffee, he
takes his daily medication. His medications are safe to take because some stupid commie liberal fought to insure their safety and that they work as advertised.
All but $10 of his medications are paid for by his employer's medical plan because some liberal union workers fought their employers for paid medical insurance - now Joe gets it too. He prepares his morning breakfast, bacon and eggs. Joe's bacon is safe to eat because some girly-man liberal fought for laws to regulate the meat packing industry.
In the morning shower, Joe reaches for his shampoo. His bottle is properly labeled with each ingredient and its amount in the total contents because some crybaby liberal fought for his right to know what he was putting on his body and how much it contained. Joe dresses, walks outside and takes a deep breath. The air he breathes is clean because some environmentalist wacko liberal fought for laws to stop industries from polluting our air. He walks to the subway station for his government-subsidized ride to work. It saves him considerable money in parking and transportation fees because some fancy-pants liberal fought for affordable public transportation, which gives everyone the opportunity to be a contributor.
Joe begins his work day. He has a good job with excellent pay, medical benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because some lazy liberal union members fought and died for these working standards. Joe's employer pays these standards because Joe's employer doesn't want his employees to call the union.
If Joe is hurt on the job or becomes unemployed, he'll get a worker compensation or unemployment check because some stupid liberal didn't think he should lose his home because of his temporary misfortune.
Its noontime and Joe needs to make a bank deposit so he can pay some bills. Joe's deposit is federally insured by the FSLIC because some godless liberal wanted to protect Joe's money from unscrupulous bankers who ruined the banking system before the Great Depression.
Joe has to pay his Fannie Mae-underwritten mortgage and his below-market federal student loan because some elitist liberal decided that Joe and the government would be better off if he was educated and earned more money over his lifetime.
Joe is home from work. He plans to visit his father this evening at his farm home in the country. He gets in his car for the drive. His car is among the safest in the world because some America-hating liberal fought for car safety standards. He arrives at his boyhood home. His was the third generation to live in the house financed by Farmers' Home Administration because bankers didn't want to make rural loans. The house didn't have electricity until some big-government liberal stuck his nose where it didn't belong and demanded rural electrification.
He is happy to see his father, who is now retired. His father lives on Social Security and a union pension because some wine-drinking, cheese-eating liberal made sure he could take care of himself so Joe wouldn't have to.
Joe gets back in his car for the ride home, and turns on a radio talk show. The radio host keeps saying that liberals are bad and conservatives are good. He doesn't mention that the beloved Republicans have fought against every protection and benefit Joe enjoys throughout his day.
Joe agrees: "We don't need those big-government liberals ruining our lives! After all, I'm a self-made man who believes everyone should take care of themselves, just like I have."
author unknown
Thanks for posting that, wonderful to see her lead continue to increase! So nice to see our state become a little brighter!
Hi Zab, I can't post except during happy hour but wanted to thank you for your continuing posts. In most cases well thought insight and views.
I could be mistaken but I always thought in America you were free to vote your choice without publicly disclosing for who or what your position is.
Trump has made it perfectly clear if you are not with him you are against him and is obsessed with revenge, a couple of his quotes are “Get even with people. If they screw you, screw them back 10 times as hard. I really believe it.” and “The point is, one of the things I say later is…get even. When somebody screws you, you screw them back in spades. And I really mean it. I really mean it. You’ve gotta hit people hard. And it’s not so much for that person. It’s other people watch.”
The NRA yesterday put out a video that appears to incite violence so yes, there is always a possibility of an attack from those who disagree with your stance.
Though the commission is asking for 10 years worth of data I suspect their only concern is having a list of who did not vote for Trump.
And that information will be available to the public while corporations & wealthy donors can hide their identities behind the Citizens United ruling.
Regardless of their political stance everyone should be outraged at this attempt to take away your right to vote privately.
Some have goals to improve life on earth, others goals are to antagonize those who don't agree with their small minds. Nice that you are so proud of your accomplishment.
Trumps cabinet meeting yesterday reminded me of The Twilight Zone episode 'It's a Good Life'
There was nothing in that article suggesting any taxpayer expense.
Was just pointing out that everyone with a (D) next to their name is not always your enemy and opposing for just the sake of not wanting them to be successful in any way is harmful to all, including yourself. Will try to not make that mistake again.
As a member the "us" group are you proud that your fellow "us" members are fighting bills that would be beneficial to as many as 1 in 7 citizens, perhaps including yourself?
This is why gun groups are up in arms over a hearing aid bill
By Victoria McGrane GLOBE STAFF MAY 28, 2017
How does a hearing aid bill turn into a fight about gun rights?
By having Elizabeth Warren as a lead legislative author, apparently.
Warren has teamed up with several Republicans on legislation creating an over-the-counter category of hearing aids, which proponents believe would lower prices, spur innovation, and help millions of people with mild-to-moderate hearing loss obtain devices and improve their lives. As few as one in seven of the estimated 30 million Americans with hearing loss gets aids, experts say, and a big reason is their high cost.
The hearing aid industry is against the bill, but in recent weeks, opposition has emerged from less expected places: gun owners and a slew of conservative groups. The backlash appears to be rooted less in the substance of the legislation and more in the fact that it’s Warren — a senator increasingly targeted by Republican groups — who is behind it.
A gun owners group argues that the legislation would impact hunters who purchase hearing enhancement devices as a way of better hearing their quarry. This, they say, is an infringement on their constitutional rights.
“In the past, antigun senators like Warren have used any pretext, however attenuated, to interfere with hunting and the exercise of Second Amendment rights,” the executive director of the Gun Owners of America, a group to the right of the bigger National Rifle Association and claims 1.5 million members, wrote in a May 16 letter to lawmakers laying out the group’s objections. “And we can only interpret this legislative initiative to be the most recent of these.”
Despite assurances from the bill’s authors that it would not affect devices used by hunters, they say, Warren cannot be trusted.
“Were Warren less of an enemy of the Second Amendment, we might give more credibility to the argument that we were protected,” the director, Erich Pratt, wrote. “But she isn’t. So we don’t.”
Like the gun owners, a coalition of conservative groups in letters and op-eds describes the hearing aid legislation as the creation of Warren’s — ignoring that she has cosponsored it with Republican Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa and that the lead cosponsor of the House version is conservative firebrand Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee.
“Senator Elizabeth Warren’s proposed legislation . . . is just another big government ploy to create more regulations and aid corporate rent-seekers while harming consumers by limiting their choices and driving prices higher,” the coalition of close to two dozen groups wrote in its own letter to lawmakers.
The six big hearing aid manufacturers, which have a lock on the market, and some hearing specialists have been critical of the legislation from the start. They warn it is dangerous to encourage people to self-diagnose hearing loss and it’s important to have professionals involved in the process of diagnosis and fitting hearing aids, as required by current rules.
Warren, joined by Grassley and others supporting the bill, argues that the intended purpose of the legislation is to reduce the amount of government involvement.
They say creating a class of over-the-counter hearing aids to be regulated by the FDA would sweep away outdated state rules that are stifling innovation and keeping cheaper devices from consumers.
“This legislation will make a life-changing difference for the millions of Americans with untreated hearing loss who don’t have access to hearing aid technology,” Warren said in a statement. “I’m really happy about the bipartisan coalition we’ve put together on this bill, in both chambers of Congress.”
The situation is a window into just how much animosity Warren inspires on the right. It also raises questions about the extent to which such political animus will get in the way of Warren trying to notch substantive legislative accomplishments.
Her term has been marked by several successes stopping nominees she disagrees with and by energizing and mobilizing support for her causes, but she has so far been less adept at getting her bills turned into law.
Warren’s bill has attracted some new GOP support in recent weeks, and it’s moving through the legislative process — a big accomplishment in the current Capitol Hill quagmire. The hearing aid proposal has been added to must-pass legislation in both the House and the Senate to reauthorize the Food and Drug Administration’s system for collecting fees from manufacturers during the drug approval process.
The Senate version was recently approved in committee with bipartisan support. The House bill has been approved by a key subcommittee, winning praise from the panel’s staunchly conservative chairman, Texas Representative Michael Burgess. The House bill, which is cosponsored by Massachusetts Representative Joe Kennedy III, still needs to be approved by the full House health committee before heading to the floor.
Allies of the legislation worry that if enough opposition emerges from potent groups such as the gun lobby, Republican lawmakers could decide to remove the hearing aid proposal to avoid a confrontation.
The legislation has triggered a flurry of lobbying activity, with hearing aid manufacturers and some specialists who sell and fit the devices squaring off against consumer technology companies that want to get into the market and hearing-loss advocates, including AARP.
Starkey Hearing Technologies, the only US-based hearing aid manufacturer, spent $50,000 lobbying on the issue in the first three months of this year — the first time in a decade the company has spent money on lobbying, according to data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan organization that tracks political money.
The Hearing Industries Association, a trade group, spent the same amount so far this year, as has Amplifon, the world’s largest hearing aid distributor (which also spent $90,000 on the issue last year).
It’s unclear how much the gun owners’s group may have spent lobbying the issue.
Among supporters of Warren’s bill, Bose Corp. wrote its own $50,000 lobbying check for work building support. Based in Framingham, Bose is among the tech companies that seeks to break into the market.
Some heavy-hitters are backing the Warren bill, including the Consumer Technology Association, which has spent more than $1 million lobbying a slew of issues this year, including for over-the-counter hearing aids.
While nearly two dozen conservative groups — including Frontiers of Freedom, Tea Party Nation, and the Center for Freedom and Prosperity — have opposed the legislation, other conservatives support it.
Samuel Hammond, a policy expert with a libertarian think tank called the Niskanen Center, said he doesn’t buy the arguments that the bill is a case of big government overreach. He has written to lawmakers in support of the bill.
Even though Warren may not be the only reason the groups are opposing the bill, he said, she is giving them more ammunition.
“She’s a really good scapegoat. She kind of poisons the well,” Hammond said. “At the very least they don’t want to give her what could be perceived as a win.”
Gun Owners of America has continued sending out messages to its members opposing the legislation. It has also been working with several House Republicans to add language to the bill that they believe would shield hunters.
Grassley told the Globe the proposal would not impact their listening devices, and he has drafted new language to add to the bill to make that clear.
“The bill wouldn’t regulate or direct the FDA to regulate personal sound amplifier systems (PSAPs), including those used by hunters,’’ he said in a statement. “PSAPs do not go through a medical device evaluation. The bill doesn’t change that.”
http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2017/05/28/elizabeth-warren-bill-hearing-aid-draws-opposition-from-gun-rights-conservative-groups/WMAAAo9Z8zAK7AzZnrRUII/story.html
Well said Zab, but these things are not as important as the desire to punish the Clintons and anyone with any degree of liberal leaning.
Nixon was weak and eventually succumbed by resigning the presidency. Trump is different. He'll fight like hell and won't back down. He'll lie and distract and obfuscate and attack and go on the offensive
A distraction ploy could pop into his head during dessert and start WWIII.
Most think I don't care for Trump due to politics. Real story is I read "The Art of the Deal" in 1988 and immediately recognized a narcissistic con man. My opinion and his demeanor have remained consistent since then, the only change is we now know he had no role in the actual writing of the book.
Too bad more have not read it, do not even have to read between the lines to understand his character.
Don't know if you are a fan of Donald Fagen (Steely Dan) or Todd Rundgren but even if not will probably enjoy the lyrics of this collaboration.
Beautiful area you reside in, that and 85260 were the only places we seriously considered when moving to the valley over 20 years ago.
What ones neighbors might be like never entered my mind back then but find this discouraging now.
http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/08/03/donald-trump-arizona-campaign-contributions-scottsdale/87939124/
Seems that after a few weeks break we are back to regular programing. Wonder who will be fired on the next episode?
Who would have thought the last season of America would be so enthralling?
It appears your perception of extremely wealthy starts much lower on the pyramid than my view which no song artists, movie stars, athletes or TV personalities qualify.
As for Bill Gates & Steve Jobs, I suggest you read a few biographies. While I admire both me neither were little angels while building their empires.
I do try to find something in common with those who's views are so different than mine in hopes we could have an interesting conversation but in reading many of your postings it does not look like that will be possible.
1) I was never a supporter of Hillary or Trump.
2) No one has ever risen to high power or extreme wealth without shady deals and possibly illegal activities.
3) Those who have reached the high levels of power and wealth will never be prosecuted. To set such a precedence would be dangerous to those who actually have the position to follow through on such a prosecution as they too have also been at some point involved events they do not wish exposed.
4) I am not condoning such activities by either party but nothing can or will be done to change the past. Harping on such things is only a distraction from today's and future actions that effect our nation and the world.