Skip navigation

Category Archives: My Opinion


All of the talk of immigration reform, deportation and the numerous laws enacted around the USA have overshadowed the makeup of most Americans. Every American except the native Americans are IMMIGRANTS or the product of immigrants. When the talk of deportation of immigrants is raised , ALL of us should pack our bags since we are immigrants or the progeny of immigrants. This talk of immigrants taking jobs or changing America is just that- talk. Talk put forth by folks who hate for the sake of hate and have deep roots in that hate. These are the same people who will not or cannot do the jobs that “illegal or legal immigrants” are supposedly taking. Apparently it is OK for these immigrants to do menial jobs but not skilled jobs that they are trained for. America has the unfortunate distinction of being one of the more Racist countries in spite of the acclaimed “Home of The Free” label touted by many. Racism is the cancer that can (and recently has) create a rift that makes us vulnerable to outside influences. These outside forces have the ability to place our concentration in areas that weaken our perception of the truth. To paraphrase Yoda:” anger leads to hate, hate leads to the dark side” , so where are we on that scale?


Anyone who has or wants healthcare needs to pay attention to what our Neer do well Congress is doing. Healthcare is not as difficult as it seems since the 535 have protected themselves from any adverse effects of healthcare changes. No matter what you have heard, read or assumed Healthcare is being legislated by people who are not on your side no matter what they say publicly. If as a citizen you do not read everything you can on healthcare and make your representative explain themselves to you then what you get is what you deserve much like the war mongering Baby we have in the Oval Office. Our country is not a reality show , it is a serious affair that requires serious and “honest” people to get work done. We have had neither for many years and have just become adjusted to expect no changes in status quo. With this being said, Don’t you think a little effort to read up on these folks is required by all of us? Too long we as citizens have been lied to and pushed to accept it with a cover lie. We must remember “Lies are Lies and will always be lies, the truth is always harder to take but it is necessary for progress”. Think in terms of math 2 plus 2 will always be 4!

Please Donate


After listening to this gentleman on several talk shows, it became clear to me that he is no better prepared to talk about the political issues than any other fast over talking representative of the trump administration. His arguments fall in the same category as “alternate facts” as coined by Kellyanne Conwoman. It is interesting that so many of Trumps spokespeople all talk fast and over talk the people they are being interviewed by or having a discussion(?) with. Apparently it is better to talk over and talk faster than the interviewer or anyone else involved in the discussion that tell the whole truth. While no politician is completely honest, the Trump spokes people seem to relish promoting the half truths and lies with aplomb and gusto ( I might add with gusto and a straight face). The Congressional backers of Trump’s repeal and replace initiative are as bad if not worse and will be in office possibly after Trump leaves by election loss or impeachment. These are the people to watch and not so much the talking heads on Faux news as the are paid to lie and cause controversy to gain ratings. Disingenuous actions and words do amount to the truth. MA

Paris Dennard

Paris Dennard (born 1982 in Phoenix, Arizona) is an American political adviser, political strategist and speaker. He often appears as a conservative expert and commentator in newsreels and discussion rounds at CNN and  NPR. He worked for the White House in 2008[1] as Director of Black Outreach for President George W. Bush. In 2016 he became communications director for the HBCU Thurgood Marshall College Fund.[2] In 2017 he is a commentator for CNN and analyst for NPR.[3]

Dennard attended the Brophy College Preparatory, a Jesuit boys high school, in his hometown until 2000, where he was the chairman of the school rector. He then studied Public Relations and Political Science through the Richard Eamer Scholars Program at the conservative Christian private Pepperdine University in Malibu. He spent a semester abroad in London and completed a bachelor’s degree in both subjects.
During his studies, he was President of the Student Government Association.
Career in politics[edit]
He was already active in his youth as a conservative junior politician. For instance, he served as the chairman of the Arizona Teenage Republicans , the new generation of the Republican Party, and appeared in the summer of 2000 as the latest speaker at the Republican National Convention in Philadelphia.
Under US President George W. Bush Dennard worked between 2005 and 2009 in the White House . During this time, he was involved in the Office of Legislative Affairs, the Office of Political Affairs and the Office of Public Liaison and Intergovernmental Affairs. In the latter, he served as White House Director of Black Outreach and was responsible for maintaining government contact with the African American population. In addition, he coordinated the meetings and travels of the President, First Lady Laura Bush, and the House of Representatives, and was responsible for the planning of various events in the White House.
After his retirement from the White House, Dennard worked as an Associate Director for Coalitions at the Republican National Committee from 2009 to 2011 . Subsequently, he served as Director of Public Affairs in a law firm in South Carolina operates  as well as in 2014 when as director of events in Washington, D.C. resident and the Arizona State University cooperating think tank McCain Institute for International Leadership. In 2012 or 2013, he and PD Consulting Group established his own consulting office for strategic communication, political management, image and brand development and media training. In July 2015, he was appointed Legislative Director of the Thurgood Marshall College Fund, which focuses on public HBCUs . Since September 2016, Dennard has been acting as Director of Strategic Communications.
In the presidential election campaign of 2016, Dennard expressed his support for the Republican candidate Donald Trump, and often defended his positions and comments in the media. He gained prominence in early February 2017, when the now elected and sworn US president Trump in a speech about Black History Month praised Dennard’s work as a pundit at CNN:
“And Paris has done an amazing job in a very hostile CNN community. He’s all by himself. You’ll have seven people, and Paris. And I’ll take Paris over the seven. But I do not watch CNN, so I do not get to see you as much as I used to. I do not like watching fake news.”
“And Paris has done a great job in a very hostile [because liberal-democratic] CNN environment. He is entirely alone. You have seven people [liberal members] and Paris. And I prefer Paris to these seven. But I do not see CNN, so I do not see you [personal address to Dennard] as often as I used to. I do not like watching Fake News.”


In Previous  blog posts I have stated that the three pages that make up the Constitution are largely unread and  misquoted. It appears that most, some or perhaps none understand that it is not written in stone but a document designed to be flexible as the country progresses (matures). The founding Fathers understood that this was a unique experiment in Governing and required a unique document as a Charter. Our civics lessons barely touch on its depth. MA

Stav Ziv,Newsweek 15 hours ago

When the public hears news of a travel ban proposed by Donald Trump being struck down in whole or in part by the courts, it should recognize the interaction between the executive and judicial branches of government and remember that freedom of religion is protected by the First Amendment. When the public reads about Trump’s campaign promise to build a wall, it should be aware that he cannot act unilaterally to make it a reality, but rather that he’ll need the legislative branch to provide funding. And when the public hears fiery rhetoric about deportation, it should be aware that even people who are in the United States illegally have the right to due process under the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause.
Unfortunately, many Americans lack fundamental civics knowledge, according to the recent Constitution Day Civics Survey by the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania, and therefore cannot understand current events.
“In light of the information in the news about First Amendment issues, the ignorance of the public about the First Amendment is startling,” Kathleen Hall Jamieson, director of APPC, tells Newsweek. “So there are times in which one needs knowledge about the Constitution to make sense of what’s happening in the news environment,” she adds. “In particular when rights are at issue it’s important that people understand what their rights are as they read the news.”

The recent Constitution Day Civics Survey by the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania found that many Americans don’t know the answers to basic civics questions. Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
The results, published on September 12, reveal that more than half of Americans (53 percent) believe people in this country illegally have no protections under the Constitution. If that weren’t startling enough, only about a quarter (26 percent) of Americans can successfully name all three branches of government, with one-third of respondents unable to name a single branch, 27 percent who knew one branch and 13 percent who knew two.
More than a third (37 percent) of respondents could not name a single specific right guaranteed under the First Amendment. Roughly 48 percent of respondents named freedom of speech, while only 15 percent said freedom of religion, 14 percent said freedom of the press, 10 percent said the right of assembly, and just a meager three percent said the right to petition the government.

While most respondents said atheists and Muslims have the same rights as other citizens (79 percent and 76 percent, respectively), a staggering 15 percent said atheists do not have the same rights and 18 percent said Muslims do not. “Any percent answering incorrectly is problematic,” says Jamieson, who points out that even the relatively low percentages indicate that a lot of people don’t understand freedom of religion.
Less than half of respondents (49 percent) said they oppose “the U.S. Congress forbidding the news media from reporting on any issue of national security without first getting government approval,” with 39 percent said they were in favor, demonstrating a lack of understanding of prior restraint even when asked without the jargon.
The survey was conducted for Annenberg by an independent research company between August 9 and 13. Participants included 1,013 U.S. adults, age 18 and older, with some responding via cell phone and some in Spanish. The margin of error was roughly 3.7 percent.

The center has been doing its annual Annenberg Constitution Day Civics Survey—ahead of Constitution Day, celebrated this year on Monday—for several years. The exact questions included change every year based on what concepts and knowledge might be necessary to understand what’s happening in the news. With immigration and religion at the heart of many political debates since the 2016 presidential election and the media under assault from the president and others, Annenberg crafted questions this year about those issues. It tends to ask the question about the three branches every year, seeing what Jamieson calls a “depressing stability of the results.
“What this survey shows is that we have not done the job that we collectively have to do as a nation in building a deep understanding of what the Constitution says and why it says it,” Jamieson says. And “simply fixing civics education at this moment will not change public knowledge. We have to find other ways to increase foundational knowledge.”

Please Donate


In the hope that all of us will and do understand what the current administration is about. The TOTUS is merely an approbation seeker who cannot exist without adoration. This why his “town Halls” are campaign style set ups with a group of selected attendees. The Tweeter-in-Chief doesn’t want any ideas that will actually make a difference to the population of the United States. His actions to date have been primarily to undo anything the past administrations have done without investigating the long range or future effects of those actions. His core supporters while thinning out feel he is doing a good job (until it bites them in the Arse). The “MAGA” movement falls right in line with the Radical right and left factions agendas, which is simply anarchy and using the dissatisfaction of his base to further their own needs. I am wondering how many fire extinguishers are in the Whitehouse and the Congress as the outpouring of lies, misrepresentations and similar non truths raise the specter of a massive fire aka :”liar, liar pants on fire”. I can conceive of a modification to the Oval office that was not reported and that is a rubber lining to allow bouncing off the walls. I will watch to see if this administration changes with the recent “bounces” by the administration. My belief is years end will bring changes that can be good and bad, which will be dominant is yet to be seen.

Please Donate


With the ascension of the “Boss Baby” (apologies to the movie) to the white house it has been difficult for me not rant continuously about the idiocy of our Congress and the die hard followers of TOTUS. Many times in reading and writing including postings from others, I have felt the need to sanitize my keyboard and screens. The rhetoric that appears online from so many talking heads especially the likes of “FOX” commentators and Mr. Rust Limbaugh is absolutely as racist and divisive as you can get without wearing the robes of the Klan on the air. I was looking at the “Blond*” onslaught that we have evidenced as talkers for the right (often to extremes). I am amazed that the mouths and noses of the people can stand to remain on their faces. I do not know if they actually believe what they say but they say it with a seeming conviction that scares the crap out of me and it should you also. The idea that they have prime time spots that contacts millions who through issues that they have allowed to grow because they have paid no attention to the people they have elected over the years. These folks have every right to be upset and should be but they have allowed themselves to be converted to ignorance by the “Hitler-Goebbels” ploy of telling the same lies over and over until it become real to the people. All Americans listen and see the same news (even when it is skewed) but many understand that all news is not equal. A pretty face and great figure does not make lies true. There are too many problems that are being under reported and just ignored for the sake of sensational journalism(?). I have starred (*) Blonds earlier in this post and that refers to this list of presenters of “news” and opinions that do not represent most of us.                                                                                     The list: Tomi Lahren, Ann Coulter, Kellyanne Conwoman, Megyn Kelly and Lara Ingraham. To top of the list of Natterers we have former speaker “Newt Gingrich” seeking recognition for some reason known only to himself.  To be kind, these folks are not dumb they are either misinformed, under informed or just  out to push an agenda for money.

Please Donate

 


Why are so many of us happy with lies? The past 10 years (at least) has brought us news outlets, mainstream and independents that bombard us with information. These streams of information in print and electronics are not all informational in the best way. It appears that some of the information is designed to rile the reader up, accent items to pile on the perceived fears of the reader or listener. This works much like the 1930’s propaganda assault by a European dictator. Some of the same themes have been carried over to some of these outlets even in this “modern” world. Once the fandom is sufficiently worked up and angry, the lies really begin and continue non stop. We now have a CIC (TOTUS) who won the office based on these lies and biases. To that end we are spending tax payer money on his business rather than the American publics business, things like infrastructure, jobs and reforms that make sense. This administration has brought us the rise of anti immigrant and minority sentiments along with the organizations who support it. These anti American groups (yes they are!) have the tacit and sometime explicit support of the Oval office. What has happened is the American public has been angry for years but blaming the wrong people for any real or perceived injustice. The real onus is on the voters for not paying attention to what their elected representatives are doing or have done. The Constitution is 3 short pages long and many have not read let alone understood it but so many invoke it. Primary issue here is anger toward the Government. That is  OK if you understand why you are angry and use that anger to write and contact the person (s) you elected to work for you. It is important to remember that a well crafted letter  or whatever form of communication you prefer is better than an endless profanity laced  rant. As an analogy: it is commonly known that in boxing and other sports anger leads to defeat. This applies to voting also, get informed (or woke) then vote. Understand the issues whether you like them or not. Always remember:

btn_donateCC_LG

Please Donate

Hitler lied his way into office and led his country into an unwinnable war against the world (sound familiar?).


It is no secret that this is not a citizen friendly administration yet the hardcore supporters do  not realize the ills  this administration is plotting on them while making them like it. the Germans did not realize the downside of their government’s agenda until it was too late. MA

The New York Times
By STEVE EDER, JESSICA SILVER-GREENBERG and STACY COWLEY

Representative Jeb Hensarling has led Republican attacks on Mr. Cordray, calling the bureau “the single most unaccountable and powerful agency in the history of our republic.”

WASHINGTON — With the election of President Trump, the nation’s consumer watchdog agency faced a quandary: how to shield the Obama-era institution from a Republican administration determined to loosen the federal government’s grip on business.
In the weeks after the election, Richard Cordray, the Democrat who leads the agency, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, directed his staff to compile stories from ordinary Americans thanking it for resolving complaints.
Sign Up For the Morning Briefing Newsletter
The anecdotes, which he solicited in an email to share with the Trump transition team, could provide a counterpoint to critics who had cast the agency as a regulatory scourge on the economy. And implicit in his request to employees was the belief that some accolades would come from parts of the country that helped elect Mr. Trump — evidence that the popularity of consumer safeguards transcends party divisions.
“There must be hundreds of such stories,” Mr. Cordray wrote in the email in November, which was obtained in a public records request. He added, “I can think of no better vindication” of the agency’s consumer relief efforts.
While many federal agencies have begun to loosen the reins on the companies they regulate, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, born out of the Dodd-Frank financial law in 2010, has taken the opposite course. Congress granted it unusually broad authority — and autonomy from the White House and Congress — to both enforce existing federal rules and write new ones, including issuing fines against financial companies.
Under Mr. Trump it has openly embraced its mission, cracking down on debt collectors, pushing out a major new financial rule on arbitration and pursuing a flurry of enforcement actions against payday lenders and others.
The approach, outlined in emails and other documents obtained through the public records request by The New York Times, comes as the Trump administration has taken an uncharacteristically low-key public stance toward the agency, a prominent blue holdout in a federal regulatory regime newly awash in red.
The White House’s restraint was based in part on a pragmatic assessment, according to people familiar with the strategy. At one point, contemplating a high-profile run on the agency, the White House examined polling data from political bellwether states, two people briefed on the matter said. The agency, they concluded, was too popular to pick a public fight with.
Republicans in Congress, who have vehemently opposed the agency since its creation, have also been unable to muster enough support to derail its work. Efforts to strike down a rule ordering new consumer protections on prepaid debit cards never made it to a vote in either the House or the Senate.
“The public does not share the G.O.P.’s ire toward the agency or its mission,” said Dean Clancy, a Tea Party activist who worked in the White House under President George W. Bush and is now a policy analyst who tracks actions of the consumer bureau. “It is an agency about protecting the little guy, and that is tough to oppose.”
The stories of gratitude rounded up by the agency’s staff for Mr. Cordray illustrated its appeal. Among them was a homeowner in Tennessee who got a disputed lien removed from a property, someone in Kentucky who got assistance warding off a debt collector pursuing a medical bill that had been paid, and a person in Pennsylvania who said the agency helped resolve a contested credit card debt.
That doesn’t mean the Trump administration and other opponents have given up on neutralizing the bureau’s work.
Administration officials have isolated the bureau from parts of the government that, under President Barack Obama, helped fulfill its mission. In public statements and documents, officials at the Justice Department, the Treasury Department and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency have all turned a cold shoulder toward Mr. Cordray and his staff.
Lobbyists for the financial industry are working behind the scenes on efforts to dismantle some of the bureau’s signature initiatives, according to people directly involved in the plans. They include lawsuits to be filed in reliably conservative courts when new regulations are issued.
For now, though, it is mostly a waiting game. Mr. Cordray’s term as director expires next July, when he could be replaced with a sympathetic Trump appointee. That moment could come earlier as there is speculation that Mr. Cordray might resign — perhaps soon — to enter the Democratic primary for governor in Ohio.
“The industry will be very happy to see him out of there,” said Alan S. Kaplinsky, a lawyer with Ballard Spahr in Philadelphia, who represents financial institutions in matters before the bureau. “The people running that agency are definitely Obama people.”
The Trump administration, eager for Mr. Cordray’s exit, has compiled a list of successor candidates in the event of his early departure, according to three people with knowledge of the preparation. Yet Mr. Trump can fire Mr. Cordray only for cause, and such a move would most likely backfire by rendering Mr. Cordray a political martyr among Democrats — perhaps bolstering his chances of winning, should he enter the governor’s race.
Lightning Rod
Since Mr. Trump’s election, Mr. Cordray, 58, has counseled his roughly 1,600 employees to tune out the political noise.
“I encourage you to remain focused on doing your good work on behalf of consumers,” he said, according to a script for a call with employees in late November. “Keep calm and carry on.”
The agency was proposed by Senator Elizabeth Warren, Democrat of Massachusetts, when she was a Harvard professor, to serve as an advocate for consumers in their dealings with financial institutions. Mr. Cordray, who was working at the bureau as its enforcement chief, was made its first director in 2012 in a recess appointment by President Obama, which heightened the partisan rancor over the regulatory crackdown on Wall Street.
Financial executives and lobbyists offer mixed reviews of his tenure.
They describe Mr. Cordray as intelligent, pleasant and accessible, willing to meet with industry constituents and hear out their lobbyists. But they also consider him a “doggedly ideological” — in the words of Richard Hunt, the chief executive of the Consumer Bankers Association, a banking trade group — leader of an agency that is structured like “a dictatorship.”
“Richard Cordray has gone above and beyond to take C.E.O.s to task on things that he had no jurisdiction over,” Mr. Hunt said.
Mr. Kaplinsky, the financial services lawyer, said Mr. Cordray had stifled innovation in the industry by being too rigid. “It is one guy who calls all the shots,” he said.
Mr. Cordray said he listened to and appreciated his opponents. “Sometimes you look at the critics and say, ‘Nobody else was telling me that, but you were,’” he said in a recent interview.
Since Mr. Trump has taken office, Mr. Cordray has faced increasingly personal attacks. A longtime critic, Representative Jeb Hensarling of Texas, the Republican chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, has led the charge.
Mr. Hensarling championed the Financial Choice Act, a bill approved by the House in June that would reverse many Dodd-Frank regulations, including curbing the consumer agency’s oversight powers and allowing the president to fire its director more easily. A vote has not been scheduled in the Senate.
He also launched an investigation over a contentious new rule that allows consumers to band together in class-action lawsuits against financial firms. Mr. Hensarling later suggested that there were legal grounds to pursue contempt-of-Congress proceedings against Mr. Cordray, accusing him of inadequately responding to subpoenas in that investigation.
Separately, Mr. Hensarling has questioned Mr. Cordray’s political activities in Ohio and called for an investigation into whether he violated a federal law that prohibits federal employees from most political campaign activities.
Mr. Hensarling’s office declined an interview request. He told The Dallas Morning News this year that the bureau “is the single most unaccountable and powerful agency in the history of our republic.” He said Democrats had “set up a tyranny” when conceiving the agency as part of the Dodd-Frank legislation.
While industry lobbyists are more circumspect, they, too, are eager to remake the bureau. Some in the banking industry would like it to disappear, but others would prefer simply to reduce its autonomy.
“I hope we’ll rebalance the pendulum in a way that ensures honest market participants have clear rules,” said David Hirschmann, who heads the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s Center for Capital Markets Competitiveness, “and those who break laws are appropriately handled through strong, vigorous enforcement.”
Mr. Cordray says the criticism is a badge of honor. He believes the bureau’s work will have lasting ramifications.
The bureau has curtailed abusive debt collection practices, reformed mortgage lending, publicized and investigated hundreds of thousands of complaints from aggrieved customers of financial institutions, and extracted nearly $12 billion for 29 million consumers in refunds and canceled debts.
This week, it began mailing out refund checks totaling $115 million to 60,000 people who had paid illegal fees to Morgan Drexen, a debt settlement company that collapsed two years ago.
The agency has also rolled out the arbitration rule, and it has been putting the finishing touches on a rule that could reshape the multibillion-dollar payday lending industry.
“This has been an agency that has gotten people’s attention in a lot of ways,” Mr. Cordray said. “They have a lot of things they say about us.”
War on Multiple Fronts
Mr. Trump has not spoken publicly about the bureau, but in mid-June, he received his first major report from the Treasury Department about the financial system and its regulators.
The assessment included recommendations to chisel away at the Dodd-Frank law, which the Treasury Department, under Mr. Obama, helped draft.
The consumer bureau figured prominently in the report, garnering 340 references and a chapter devoted to the opportunity that Republicans have to change it.
“The C.F.P.B. was created to pursue an important mission, but its unaccountable structure and unduly broad regulatory powers have led to regulatory abuses and excesses,” the report said.
Mr. Trump, who ordered the report, has made his disdain for the Dodd-Frank law clear, issuing an executive order and presidential memos calling for a rollback of Obama-era regulations — and empowering Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin to take the lead in doing so.
“Treasury took the reins,” said Mr. Hirschmann, of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, who participated in meetings with Treasury staff members as they researched the report. “I’ve been impressed.”
Similarly, the Justice Department under Mr. Trump has taken some shots at the consumer bureau. In one court case, it sided with a mortgage lender questioning the agency’s constitutionality.
The bureau had fined the lender, PHH Corporation, $109 million and accused it of illegal kickbacks. PHH denied wrongdoing, appealed the ruling, claimed the bureau was unconstitutional and asked a judge to shut it down.
At a hearing in May before the federal appeals court for the District of Columbia, a Justice Department lawyer argued alongside industry lawyers and said the bureau’s structure was unconstitutional and should be changed. The court is not expected to rule on the case for several months.
Other alliances within the federal government have deteriorated.
The consumer agency had been collaborating with the Department of Education on overhauling the $1.3 trillion student loan market to ensure that private companies collecting loan payments abided by consumer protections.
But soon after Betsy DeVos was appointed education secretary this year, the department scrapped much of that work. In particular, the department eliminated a requirement that federal student loan servicers adopt a simplified repayment disclosure form that the consumer bureau spent years developing.
Lobbyists are also feeling empowered by the change in administrations. Working on behalf of payday lenders, they have flooded the consumer agency with comments, more than a million in all, urging it to halt a proposed crackdown on the industry.
At some payday loan counters, customers were handed comment forms alongside their checks and urged to tell the bureau just how important payday lending was to their livelihood. Hundreds of thousands of those comments, often with nearly identical wording, poured into government databases.
So far, that push has not deterred the bureau. Within the agency, there is a mounting sense of urgency to get the final version of the payday rules out, according to two people familiar with the process. The new rules would represent the first time that the lucrative market — the payday industry collects $7 billion annually in fees — was directly regulated by the federal government.
The bureau’s rollout last month of its rule allowing class-action lawsuits in some arbitration cases has also rattled Wall Street, and is widely seen as a provocative stance against the prevailing political momentum in Washington.
Opponents of the rule have received an assist from the Trump administration. Keith Noreika, the acting currency comptroller, who serves as the chief bank regulator, asked Mr. Cordray to delay publication of the rule, saying his staff needed more time to review whether it posed a threat to the safety and soundness of the banks.
Mr. Cordray, in a response to Mr. Noreika, said the idea that class actions were a threat to the banking system was “plainly frivolous.” (He also said he had already sent the rule to the Federal Register for publication a week before he received Mr. Noreika’s letter.)
A challenge to the rule passed the House, but has stalled in the Senate. Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, has said he would not back a repeal of the rule. Other Republicans are also wavering.
“Moderate Republicans don’t want to be painted as anti-consumer,” said Isaac Boltansky, the director of policy research at Compass Point, a research firm tracking the fate of the agency’s recent rules.

Please Donate


It started when the first Europeans landed in what is now known as America. The Indigenous people (Native Americans) accepted them in some cases and rejected them in others. The history is not as clear  as stated in many history books. Once here (in America) the Europeans pushed their culture on to the Native Americans often in a most painful way rather than understanding the existing culture norms and accepting them as a different culture that could be used as a means to assimilate. These incursions and finally dominance by force has  caused the loss of  several cultures which we are now trying understand with what little of them remains. The recent rallies of Alt right and other White Nationalist groups have had the shouts of “America for Whites, go back where you came from” and other Racial statements. Is there any thought given to who actually should go back where they came from? If it were left up to the Native Americans , I am sure the same shouts could be heard. It is unfortunate that so many people are exerting what they call “white privilege” to cover their nefarious deeds and urged on by the President of the United States. Our European allies are looking at this country with mouths agape as our “TOTUS” continues on a tear to reverse anything done by previous administrations without a first or second thought about the ramifications that may ensue. Unfortunately his base supporters are so caught up in the campaign style rhetoric that they cannot understand how his Presidency and the actions associated with will affect them now and later. Our current administration lead by the Tweeter in Chief and less by the neer do well  GOP Congressional members appears more like a cat trying to cover up in a too full litter box.

Please Donate


‘Tis but thy name that is my enemy;
Thou art thyself, though not a Montague.
What’s Montague? it is nor hand, nor foot,
Nor arm, nor face, nor any other part
Belonging to a man. O, be some other name!
What’s in a name? that which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet;
So Romeo would, were he not Romeo call’d,
Retain that dear perfection which he owes
Without that title. Romeo, doff thy name,
And for that name which is no part of thee
Take all myself. (2.2.38-49)

This Excerpt from Shakespeare speaks of a name being a cover for what the name covers. What would we call the current Leader(?) of the free world? A person who had no real desire to be President and is unwilling to learn the job. The actions of this person has apparently a single purpose and that is to be adored. That desire has lead us to a tweet storm, campaign style rallies with no subjects, abrogation of the duties of the office and obvious support of Racism in America. It is bad enough that under our (American) system of government,  Racists have a public voice but now they feel empowered by the our so called leader. Our neer do well Congress is largely absent in this issue as they are surreptitiously eroding our rights to suit the money people who support them. Our Congress has done nothing to maintain the progress made over the years and that lack of  attention to detail has allowed the rise of Donald Trump. The staunch supporters of Trump have failed to understand that their issues should be laid at the feet of their elected officials as they have been in office for a lot longer than Donnie.  If we  as voters do not pay close attention to what the Congress is doing, we will be doomed to have  years of poor governance followed by an economic collapse. We should remember that no changes occur in a vacuum and ignoring what our elected officials do out of the public view is more important than what is presented publicly.

Please Donate