After WW II less than 5 walls.
1989 When the Berlin Wall went down, there were 15 walls on national borders.
Today, there are close to 70 walls.
First wall project will be 700 miles of double fencing, 14 feet high, and patrolled by Border Patrol.
How far will Trump go as he reviews the Obama Progressive Agenda. Here is a potential answer to that question.
The problem defined
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, founded at the direction of Obama, with Elizabeth Warren as its first chairman, has been a target for conservative politicians and many in the financial-services industry since its creation in 2010, with the passage of Dodd/Frank (July 2010). At issue are at least two matters, one being the fact that besides being an oversight agency in such matters as the Wells Fargo banking scam, it is also a wealth redistribution agency, moving 12 billion dollars of cash relief into the hands of 25 million folks who may or may not have been financially harmed. And that is because of a second and more profound problem.
As it turns out, the language written into the bill is purposefully vague, giving existing agency heads the right to "interpret" the law in ways that suit the purposes and redistribution agenda of the Marxist inspired Progressives currently in charge. In fact, the language is “ . . . . so broad and vague that it has let them go after anything they don’t like, even if there’s no evidence of any consumer harm or injury,”
This federal oversight agency wants to allow clients to sue financial advice services . . . . . a good thing on the surface, but a very bad thing in view of the fact that "financial advice," in and of itself, is being criminalized.
Advice versus Product Performance
Look, the Market Place is volatile and full of risk. This federal agency is working to take as much risk out of market investment as possible, rather than punishing wrong doers after the fact. Even worse, the agency is working to prevent the giving of financial advise as to certain financial products, rather than allowing the market place to determine what is viable and what is not. Understand that we are not talking about what is legal or not, only what is financial viable, and, therefore, preferable, or not. We are talking about advice that, in the end, may prove to be errant advice. Under Obama, only good advice is allowed, and it ain't good unless it makes a profit - per Obama thinking.
Protection of the Unsuspecting Consumer versus Governmental Meddling
Progressive do-gooder oversight has decided (not the consumer but the agency) that certain comparable low cost Index (S&P) Funds are more to the liking of the consumer than some higher-cost and actively managed index funds and is making it illegal to get counsel as to these funds. The funds exist and are legal, but the consumer cannot get financial counseling as to the purchase and or profitability of these pre-existing and legal Market Funds. Financial counseling will be illegal, not certain Index funds.
During the Trump era, you may become familiar with Anthony Saramucci. He is an adviser to the Trump transition team, a FoxBusinessNews adviser, and, is the founder of SkyBridge Capital. He argues that this provision/purpose of the so-called Consumer Financial Protection Agency policy would force small investment advisers out of business and drive folks away from managed Index Funds that might actually serve the financial client better. At the heart of this practice is the Progressive's hatred for "profit." Market managers make a profit for the services, and, the Federal Government has decided that this is evil.
Insight into the comprehensive nature (or not) of the Trump Era
The anti-advice provisions of the Agency's oversight law, will not go into full affect until April of 2017. The Trump presidency can, apparently, simply decide not to enforce this aspect of the Consumer Protection Agency, or choose to ask for a complete revision of the oversight statute(s) . . . . . we are talking about Dodd/Frank.
At any rate, this is a potential "first strike" aspect of the Trump agenda. If he goes there, it will tell his supporters much as to just how comprehensive his review and/or replacement of the Obama's progressive agenda will be.
________________________
Related article: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-11-17/the-glory-days-of-elizabeth-warren-s-cfpb-are-numbered
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, founded at the direction of Obama, with Elizabeth Warren as its first chairman, has been a target for conservative politicians and many in the financial-services industry since its creation in 2010, with the passage of Dodd/Frank (July 2010). At issue are at least two matters, one being the fact that besides being an oversight agency in such matters as the Wells Fargo banking scam, it is also a wealth redistribution agency, moving 12 billion dollars of cash relief into the hands of 25 million folks who may or may not have been financially harmed. And that is because of a second and more profound problem.
As it turns out, the language written into the bill is purposefully vague, giving existing agency heads the right to "interpret" the law in ways that suit the purposes and redistribution agenda of the Marxist inspired Progressives currently in charge. In fact, the language is “ . . . . so broad and vague that it has let them go after anything they don’t like, even if there’s no evidence of any consumer harm or injury,”
This federal oversight agency wants to allow clients to sue financial advice services . . . . . a good thing on the surface, but a very bad thing in view of the fact that "financial advice," in and of itself, is being criminalized.
Advice versus Product Performance
Look, the Market Place is volatile and full of risk. This federal agency is working to take as much risk out of market investment as possible, rather than punishing wrong doers after the fact. Even worse, the agency is working to prevent the giving of financial advise as to certain financial products, rather than allowing the market place to determine what is viable and what is not. Understand that we are not talking about what is legal or not, only what is financial viable, and, therefore, preferable, or not. We are talking about advice that, in the end, may prove to be errant advice. Under Obama, only good advice is allowed, and it ain't good unless it makes a profit - per Obama thinking.
Protection of the Unsuspecting Consumer versus Governmental Meddling
Progressive do-gooder oversight has decided (not the consumer but the agency) that certain comparable low cost Index (S&P) Funds are more to the liking of the consumer than some higher-cost and actively managed index funds and is making it illegal to get counsel as to these funds. The funds exist and are legal, but the consumer cannot get financial counseling as to the purchase and or profitability of these pre-existing and legal Market Funds. Financial counseling will be illegal, not certain Index funds.
During the Trump era, you may become familiar with Anthony Saramucci. He is an adviser to the Trump transition team, a FoxBusinessNews adviser, and, is the founder of SkyBridge Capital. He argues that this provision/purpose of the so-called Consumer Financial Protection Agency policy would force small investment advisers out of business and drive folks away from managed Index Funds that might actually serve the financial client better. At the heart of this practice is the Progressive's hatred for "profit." Market managers make a profit for the services, and, the Federal Government has decided that this is evil.
Insight into the comprehensive nature (or not) of the Trump Era
The anti-advice provisions of the Agency's oversight law, will not go into full affect until April of 2017. The Trump presidency can, apparently, simply decide not to enforce this aspect of the Consumer Protection Agency, or choose to ask for a complete revision of the oversight statute(s) . . . . . we are talking about Dodd/Frank.
At any rate, this is a potential "first strike" aspect of the Trump agenda. If he goes there, it will tell his supporters much as to just how comprehensive his review and/or replacement of the Obama's progressive agenda will be.
________________________
Related article: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-11-17/the-glory-days-of-elizabeth-warren-s-cfpb-are-numbered
Why did Hillary lose Michigan? In a word, arrogance.
Yes, they are still counting votes in Michigan . . . . . looks like Hillary will lose that state by 12,000 votes. A week after the election, I dare say "after a black swan election," she lost the state to Trump because she thought the state was a "lock" for her campaign . . . . . and this conclusion comes to us per members of her own staff. In fact, near the end, staffers were desperately urging her to recommit to the Michigan vote. She did not.
Her campaign was so out of touch, that campaign volunteers were sent to a trailer park only to find that the park had burned down months ago. Her canvassing operations were a 12th the size of John Kerry's. Until two weeks prior to November 8, Hillary still believed that her election would be more a coronation than a victory march.
She was in the race of her life, and in the last seconds, that danged old turtle crossed the line before her. Understand this: that was not just another election; it was the end of her life in politics and the $750,000 speech fee.
Now you know.
Her campaign was so out of touch, that campaign volunteers were sent to a trailer park only to find that the park had burned down months ago. Her canvassing operations were a 12th the size of John Kerry's. Until two weeks prior to November 8, Hillary still believed that her election would be more a coronation than a victory march.
She was in the race of her life, and in the last seconds, that danged old turtle crossed the line before her. Understand this: that was not just another election; it was the end of her life in politics and the $750,000 speech fee.
Now you know.
Here is the winning argument for keeping the Electoral College (as if it could ever be changed).
One
final (?) point in favor of the Electoral College . . . and it only
works if you are a conservative. (A Liberal couldn't care less).
Take away the College and these 50 most populated counties in the US would win ALL national elections. Romney won 4 of these counties, Trump won 3. Do the math and tell me how the Conservative Nation survives. The smaller states need "minority protection" and that is only achieved via the Electoral College.
source for the following: Dave Leip’s Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections, Associated Press (IL, MA, ME, MS). I think you can click on the image to enlarge.
_____________________________
Take away the College and these 50 most populated counties in the US would win ALL national elections. Romney won 4 of these counties, Trump won 3. Do the math and tell me how the Conservative Nation survives. The smaller states need "minority protection" and that is only achieved via the Electoral College.
source for the following: Dave Leip’s Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections, Associated Press (IL, MA, ME, MS). I think you can click on the image to enlarge.
_____________________________
Our elections are won or lost in the Electoral College. We are a Democratic Republic. Get used to it.
Get rid of the Electoral College and you have silenced the voices of all those who live in middle America. We are a nation of minorities and states. And the smaller states are one of the many minorities that need to have a voice.
We protect our minorities with laws and election results. We protect the smaller states via the Electoral College.
Electoral College results and margins of victory
(Source: Data from Dave Leip’s Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections)
Here we go:
JESSE JACKSON: Obama should pardon Hillary...
But we thought she was innocent?
When was the last time a government official was pardoned by a sitting president? When Ford pardoned Nixon . . . . so Hillary becomes only the second Administrative head to earn a pardon, in these modern times.
But we thought she was innocent?
When was the last time a government official was pardoned by a sitting president? When Ford pardoned Nixon . . . . so Hillary becomes only the second Administrative head to earn a pardon, in these modern times.
Forget all those headlines about the Trump campaign being in disarray. The following headline is the only one that matters.
Rush Limbaugh:
Trump Transition: Getting Set to Kick Ass
— RUSH: I told the Snerdley, he had not heard — have you heard that
Ted Cruz met with Trump for a full hour? Ted Cruz was at Trump Tower
for five hours meeting with various people, a full hour with Donald
Trump, and the word is he's …
Except for the Trump character issues, virtually every news article and polling result over the past 15 months was a stinking lie and November 8 proves my point.
This headline and its lede imply that there was such a thing as "real news" coming from the Establishment Media. Kind of funny in view of the fact that most major outlets presented a nominal apology for the role they played in the election. Of course the apologies (Wa/Post, L.A. and N.Y. Times etc) lasted less than 12 hours before all of the Marxist Media began their 24/7/365 assault on the Conservative Nation. Understand that the Left is not about #Never Trump. Rather, this is all about #Never Conservative Nation. They are up against the wall, having lost their national position and political power, all during the Obama years . . . . and the midterms for 2018 are looming large. 24 Democrat Senators are up for re-election in that year, and 12 are in red states.
Craig Silverman / BuzzFeed: Viral Fake Election News Outperformed Real News On Facebook In Final Months Of The US Election — A BuzzFeed News analysis found that top fake election news stories generated more total engagement on Facebook than top election stories from 19 major news outlets combined.
You should know that virtually every "national poll" conducted in 2015/2016, by NBC,ABC,CBS, USToday,CNN, HLN, MSNBC, and most of the print media were false and they were proven to be false on the day of the Election.
On Election night, it took the Corporate Media nearly four freaking hours to announce that Pennsylvania had gone to Trump and, with that victory he had won the election. The four hour stall was a blatant effort to hide the "bad" news of a Trump victory in a desperate hope that something would happen that would reverse the obvious direction of the election.
More than the polls, every story, for nearly a year and a half, talking about election outcomes, was part of an organized lie. We know this because Trump won . . . . . . proving these stories to be false, and false the moment they were published.
There is nothing that proves a lie to be a lie more soundly, than a healthy dose of reality . . . . . . and reality came around midnight, pst, on November 8.
Craig Silverman / BuzzFeed: Viral Fake Election News Outperformed Real News On Facebook In Final Months Of The US Election — A BuzzFeed News analysis found that top fake election news stories generated more total engagement on Facebook than top election stories from 19 major news outlets combined.
You should know that virtually every "national poll" conducted in 2015/2016, by NBC,ABC,CBS, USToday,CNN, HLN, MSNBC, and most of the print media were false and they were proven to be false on the day of the Election.
On Election night, it took the Corporate Media nearly four freaking hours to announce that Pennsylvania had gone to Trump and, with that victory he had won the election. The four hour stall was a blatant effort to hide the "bad" news of a Trump victory in a desperate hope that something would happen that would reverse the obvious direction of the election.
More than the polls, every story, for nearly a year and a half, talking about election outcomes, was part of an organized lie. We know this because Trump won . . . . . . proving these stories to be false, and false the moment they were published.
There is nothing that proves a lie to be a lie more soundly, than a healthy dose of reality . . . . . . and reality came around midnight, pst, on November 8.
Millennials, this is why a simple "democracy" is a really bad idea:
Millennials, think about this (emphasis on "think"): In a true
"democracy," majority opinion would rule the day. Gays would lose the
marriage vote; Blacks would lose many anti-discrimination votes; women
would have never won the right to vote (back in the day); property
owners would have no path to lower property taxation, students would
never be in the running for help in dealing with their college debts;
and Bernie Sanders would have no political voice . . . . . all
of this and more if a simple one person/one vote majority was the law. That
is why the United States is a democratic republic. If not a
"republic," all minorities in this country would be without a viable voice and without a path for change.
Let me put it in terms of a reality related question: Do you
Millennials think it would be a good thing to have a short, fat, white
conservative (that would be me) in charge of your lives? I mean, I am
for it. In a true Democracy, I would be your boss. Dude !!!!!!!!!!
Let me know when your next demonstration is scheduled. I intend to help because a simple majority would put me in charge.
Let me know when your next demonstration is scheduled. I intend to help because a simple majority would put me in charge.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)