Why would anyone knowingly vote for more financial chaos and more domestic and foreign corruption?
And by just abut anyone's standards of life in this great country, the Clintons are criminals and always have been, it's in their DNA.
Putting Hillary in the Oval Office would just mean opening the United States Treasury to Clintons with a direct route to their personal bank accounts and the 'Clinton Crime Family Foundation'.
Why is this so obvious to me and many others, but lost on millions in our country that will inevitably vote for these two morally dysfunctional people?
Good video on how the democrats believe transparency is bad as it will show how they are stealing the public blind. As with as with most politicians, spending is the easier answer to all problems. Any problem can be fixed if you throw enough of other peoples money at the problem.
But in the case of the progressive socialist liberal democrats, other peoples money is used as a club to beat any opposition to political death that might have a different opinion on how the money should be spent. That is, any opposition to their agenda for control.
The democrats have good reason to hide what they do to the population, as if voters ever become awake of how democrats really see their voters, it would be their demise. Sadly though, the chance of this happening, become more then zombies waiting to be told how and what to do next, is very remote.
As the saying goes, 'money is the mothers milk of politics', ands the democrats have no problem taking all of the money if they believe it will serve the supposes to gain ultimate power. There are no limits, moral or physical. There are no down side or bad consequences, only what needs and must be spent to fulfill the agenda.
The Left’s Push to Get Rid of Government Spending Transparency Genevieve Wood /@genevievewood/
How transparent is your state government’s budget? According to North Dakota Treasurer Kelly Schmidt, it can vary widely from state to state. In an interview with The Daily Signal, Schmidt explains why no matter where you live, citizens should be aware of a growing movement among liberal lawmakers to make it harder for you to see how your state government is spending your money.
And then we have to believe Mr Ogbjma's good 'fist bumping' buddy in crime, Hugo, now dead and gone, is responsible for this country failure and his legacy of communist, Marxist ideology lives on to reek havoc in the country. The question now is why would Mr Ogbjma find such kinship with Hugo Chavez? And for that matter, his visit to Cuba he found the Castro brothers charming and their compatible life style interesting, if not enviable.
The Real Crisis Starts... Now That the Beer Is Gone
By Dr. Steve Sjuggerud
Tuesday, May 3, 2016
Venezuela is out of beer...
Uh-oh. The real crisis in Venezuela is about to begin. I'm not kidding...
Venezuela's beer maker is the country's largest private company. It stopped beer production at the last of its four plants on Friday. In short, the government won't let it use its money to import malted barley.
No money, no barley. No barley, no beer. It might sound funny, but this is a far worse sign than you can imagine...
When I started traveling to remote places in Latin America in the early 1990s, I learned one silly truth: No matter where in the world you are, you can always find a cold beer.
I remember staying with a family for a few days in the middle of nowhere in Nicaragua in 1992. At the time, Nicaraguans had absolutely nothing. Hardly any possessions. The room I stayed in had a dirt floor. They didn't have electricity... but somehow, this family always managed to have cold beer. "Now, how is that?" I wondered. Even though I don't drink, I took note of it, because it seemed pretty extreme.
As I traveled to more countries, I realized that no matter where you are, you are never far from a cold beer. "What would happen if the beer was gone?" I wondered. I thought that was only a hypothetical question... Of course, the beer would never be gone...
I remember driving for miles in Venezuela's "desert" – the Medanos de Coro (the Sand Hills of Coro). There was nothing for miles... Then, on the side of the road, we saw a little white building... As we drove closer, you could see the little building was well-maintained. A polar bear was painted on the side of the building...
At first, you might think a polar bear is a bizarre choice for a beer mascot... until you're in the heat of the Venezuelan desert. The white building sells one product – Polar Beer. "Polar," my American buddy said to the only person in the building.
"Que?" the Venezuelan guy asked, standing with a thousand cold beers behind him. "Pole-ER," my buddy Rick said, adding emphasis.
"Que?" the guy asked again. Rick motioned over to me in the car... "Steve, can you help me out? This guy doesn't understand me." I walked up to the guy and said, "Po-LAAAR," in my best Spanish accent (rolling the "R" at the end, even though I wasn't sure if I was supposed to or not).
"Ah! Po-LAAR! Why didn't you say so!" the guy said to me (in Spanish). In the Sand Hills in Venezuela... Rick got his cold beer.
It proved, yet again, that no matter where you are, you are never far from a cold beer. But today, for the first time in my memory, that statement won't be true...
The situation is so dire in Venezuela, you can no longer get your cold beer. As an article in Forbes explained...
It's not because people don't have the money to buy it. Polar, the local manufacturer, can sell all it is able to make. It's not because Polar can't make money doing so either: the company makes a good profit making and selling beer. Nope, it's purely and only because [President] Maduro and the other Chavistas are entirely incompetent at the management of an economy.
Bingo. Nail, meet head.
It's government mismanagement – to the extreme. And the results are ugly.
Last week, I told you Venezuela's government was too broke to print its own money... and that government employees' workweek is now down to two days, because Venezuela isn't able to produce enough energy. (The weekend now starts Tuesday afternoon.) This is the country with the world's largest proven oil reserves – and it can't produce energy.
If being out of money and out of energy weren't strong enough signs the country is in collapse... we've now reached a point I'd never thought we'd see...
The beer is gone!
"The power crisis is likely to be President Maduro's undoing," the experts say. They shouldn't underestimate the beer crisis. It's the surest sign yet. Venezuela is a disaster, and about to descend into chaos.
I expect it will get worse before it gets better. Avoid Venezuela as an investment...
And if you ever wondered why there is so much anger and frustration among the Republicans and Conservative base, wonder no longer. It has become apparent that the Republican party is of no use to the American people and must be reorganized and rebuilt to reflect the needs and wants of their collective voting base.
Failing in this will result in the destruction of the entire Republican party.
How Republicans Lost Control of the Spending Fight in Congress Rob Bluey /@RobertBluey/
Republicans arrived in Washington this year promising a return to “regular order” in Congress. It was a hallmark of Paul Ryan’s quest to be House speaker and Mitch McConnell’s way of showing that the Senate could get things done. Gone were the days of omnibus spending bills and continuing resolutions—or the dreaded combination of the two, known as a CRomnibus. In their place would be a budget and 12 spending bills.
But four months into 2016, House Republicans have yet to approve a budget (missing the April 15 deadline) and their Senate counterparts are unable to pass even the least controversial spending bill. Their earlier promises have given way to the prospect of 2016 being a repeat of the status quo that Americans are rejecting in record numbers this election year. And to make matters worse for conservatives, Republicans are proposing to spend more money and avoiding substantive policy fights. What went wrong?
Not surprisingly, conservatives blame Republican leadership in the House and Senate for losing control of the government spending fight—viewing concessions to President Barack Obama as an abandonment of GOP campaign promises. Last year, Republicans added the Senate to their control but ended up cutting a deal with Obama to bust the budget caps agreed to in 2011. Now, as Obama’s term draws to a close, GOP leadership would prefer to stick with the higher spending number. That number—$1.07 trillion—is $30 billion higher than what conservatives want. Republicans don’t have the votes to pass that $1.07 trillion budget in the House, although they are toying with the idea of a so-called “sidecar” that would make cuts in spending. Leadership sent signals Friday that such a plan might win approval when lawmakers return after a weeklong recess. There’s no guarantee it would ever be enacted, however, giving conservatives pause.
While the House is facing a standstill over its budget, the Senate is charging ahead with a series of appropriations bills that adopt the higher level of spending. The most recent example comes in the form of the Senate’s energy and water spending bill. It’s the first of 12 spending measures on the docket. The appropriations bill spends $355 million more than what was enacted last year and comes in $261 million higher than Obama’s budget request. GOP leadership justified the higher spending by saying it conforms to the budget deal that then-Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, and Obama struck last fall before Boehner left office. Conservatives stridently opposed the measure in October and remain against it today. As if the higher spending numbers weren’t enough to infuriate conservatives, they also were told their policy riders wouldn’t be included in the underlying bill or considered in committee. Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., chairman of the appropriations subcommittee overseeing the energy and water measure, made clear in March that “controversial riders will not be added.”
Republicans who wanted to amend the spending bill would need to do it on the Senate floor—a harder feat to accomplish. And that’s exactly how it played out last week. After adopting eight amendments by voice vote last week, the Senate took roll call votes on nine others.
Four GOP amendments were rejected while five Democratic amendments won approval—by a wide margin in some cases. Three Democratic amendments had 70 or more votes. In one case, Democrats outmaneuvered their GOP colleagues on a measure to block funding for the Environmental Protection Agency’s controversial Waters of the United States rule. Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., demanded a 60-vote threshold because he said it wasn’t germane to the bill. Republican leadership acquiesced and the amendment failed, even though it had the support of 54 senators, including four Democrats.
“The strategy is designed to let moderate Republicans get on record voting for nominally good conservative policy while still allowing bad liberal policy to move forward,” an aide to a conservative senator explained to The Daily Signal.
Since Republicans took control of the House in 2011, they’ve proposed around $25 trillion in savings. Yet the national debt has gone up by $5.7 trillion.
As the energy and water spending bill moved closer to final passage last week, Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., announced he would introduce an amendment related to the Iran nuclear deal. The move infuriated Democrats, prompting them to filibuster the spending measure.
Now, the GOP is left wondering if Senate Democrats were ever going to make a good-faith effort to pass appropriations bills or if they just wanted to use the process to load them up with liberal policy and more spending. Ultimately, that might work in Democrats’ favor if lawmakers resort to an omnibus spending bill—a scenario that appears more likely. With the Senate gone for a weeklong recess, it’s unclear if the energy and water appropriations bill—or any that follow—will win the bipartisan approval that Senate Majority Leader McConnell so craves.
Conservatives, meanwhile, are left wondering if that means they’ll once again be presented with a massive bill that spends more money, lacks conservative policy riders, and funds government programs that have proven to be ineffective. They’ll find out leadership’s next move in about a week. Until then, it’s recess on Capitol Hill.
To hell with the protection under the law as written in our Constitution where ever one is treated equally under that law. This institution, Nova Academy, as many others have taken the 'new wave' attitude, ideology, that it ' just easier to negate the rights of the majority from fear of an attack on their institution by the minority that demands they have their way or else. And this is the new norm, the media is always there to place their collective thumbs on the scales of justice to make sure the progressive ideology of 'all inclusiveness' is followed. If the media and other progressive organizations find the new rules aren't being followed, the next step is to destroy those that are in opposition. None of this is about the law of individual rights, this is about forcing individuals and organizations to do the will of a minority. This is about the power to control others.
Nationally Ranked School Counters Complaint of Transgender Discrimination Kelsey Harkness /@kelseyjharkness/
A nationally recognized charter school in Minnesota is fighting a complaint filed by the parents of a transgender kindergartner who allege the school enabled discrimination against their child. Nova Classical Academy administrators said they will deny the allegations, filed last month with the city of St. Paul, while continuing their push to improve school policies to protect and respect all students.
“At Nova, we are committed to providing a school environment free of gender-bias and discrimination of any kind, where every student feels safe, welcomed, accepted, and valued,” the school said in a formal statement. “We plan to respond to the complaint by denying the allegations. We will present evidence that the school has taken all due measures to protect the student’s rights.”
In attempting to accommodate one kindergartner’s rights, however, two parents told The Daily Signal last week, the school is trampling on their own.
While working to build a more inclusive environment, they say, the school is excluding the rights of parents who object to the idea of introducing the topic of gender identity to their children at such a young age. “The other side basically didn’t want us to have a voice, calling everything we say hateful or discriminatory or both,” one parent involved in recent events told The Daily Signal. David and Hannah Edwards, the parents of the kindergartner, filed the complaint March 24 with the St. Paul Human Rights and Equal Economic Opportunity Department. It alleges that Nova Classical Academy failed to adequately protect their child from bullying and other forms of discrimination. Their child was born male, the Edwardses say, but now presents as a transgender girl. Nova Classical Academy is a K-12 public charter school with 920 students. Based on the 2013-14 school year, U.S. News and World Report ranked its upper school as the No. 1 high school in Minnesota and the No.16 high school in the nation.
Gender Justice, the legal group representing the Edwardses in their complaint, said the school:
(a) failed to protect their child and other gender nonconforming and transgender students at Nova from persistent gender-based bullying and hostility, and (b) denied their child the ability to undergo a gender transition at Nova in a safe and timely way, as she had in all other areas of her life.
Instead of alleging the school violated Title IX provisions that ban discrimination in federally funded education programs—which lawyers for several other cases of this nature have alleged—David and Hannah Edwards argue that Nova Classical Academy’s treatment of their child violated St. Paul’s human rights ordinance (Section 183.05). ‘Introducing Delay’ Specifically, the complaint alleges the school failed to protect the Edwardses’ child from “gender-based bullying and hostility” because school leadership “stopped staff” from adding the book “My Princess Boy” to its anti-bullying curriculum. The Edwardses’ complaint goes on to say the school denied their child’s right to undergo a gender transition “in a safe and timely way.” It reads:
In a meeting that evening, we were told that the school was not willing to use effective materials like ‘I Am Jazz;’ would not ever conduct gender education, whether proactive or corrective, without first introducing delay and inviting or encouraging families to ‘opt out;’ and would not even—as a bare minimum—simply inform our child’s classmates of her preferred name and pronouns, without first delaying for days and inviting or encouraging families to ‘opt out’ of this information.
“As a result of these violations,” the Edwardses wrote, “we were forced to withdraw her from Nova.” “I Am Jazz” is a children’s book based on the experiences of a transgender girl named Jazz Jennings, 15, who was born male and went public as identifying as female at age 6. A reality TV show of the same name on TLC follows her life today. The Daily Signal sought comment and additional details from Gender Justice, but it has not responded to emails and calls. A spokesman for the city’s Department of Human Rights and Equal Economic Opportunity said he could not comment because the couple’s complaint is part of an active investigation. Minnesota Kindergartners Forced to Confront Gender Identity The Edwardses aren’t alone in leaving the school over their child’s case. In February, The Daily Signal reported that at least 10 parents transferred their children to different schools because of “nonconformity issues,” saying the school’s plan to adopt a gender inclusion policy for elementary-age students was too far-reaching. Since then, The Daily Signal has learned that more parents have taken their children out of Nova Classical Academy, and more plan to by year’s end. “It’s too bad the family didn’t stay,” one mother who removed all her children from the school said of the Edwardses. “The school has proceeded in changing school policy just as the family requested and has lost and continues to lose many of the original families that actually came to the school for classical education.” ‘Moving Deliberately’ “My personal feeling is that the school has given the other side everything that they want,” another parent involved in the events at Nova Classical Academy told The Daily Signal, adding:
Furthermore, if we had not fought back, I think they would have implemented all of this already. I feel like the school wanted to make sure they followed all of their bylaws so that they didn’t get sued. Also they know a lot of parents are unhappy so they have taken their time and are going through the processes. But in the end they were going to implement all of the asked-for policies. To me, the other side is getting everything they wanted, just not when they wanted it, which is right away.
Because of the sensitive nature of this issue, the parents requested that their names not be published.
Eric Williams, executive director of Nova Classical Academy, confirmed to The Daily Signal that the school is in the process of developing a “specific policy to assure our school is welcoming to students, regardless of gender identity or gender expression.” “The board is moving deliberately to assure that we get it right,” Williams said in an email. “We expect to adopt a policy next month [in May].” That policy won’t come easy. Parents concerned over coming changes say the policy—and the process the school has used to get there—tramples on their First Amendment rights to free speech, religion, and association. “The policy itself is everything and more that the Edwards family was asking for,” the second parent said, adding:
As regards explicit mention of the First Amendment, it has been decided for the purposes of this policy that they will not include anything about that, as all relevant First Amendment protections are listed in other parts of law and policy. It is the perception of many that they are doing this to err on the side of transgender students when it comes to what may be unsettled law regarding addressing people by their preferred names and pronouns in schools.
‘Not a Negotiation Process’ Williams, the head of Nova Classical Academy, told The Daily Signal that the school not only won’t tolerate but has a legal obligation to “prohibit” speech by parents, students, or others “that causes another person to be belittled.” It is because of this attitude that some parents say they have left. “On the news, [the school will] say, ‘We want to listen to them, parents have sent endless letters, they have come to the board meetings and gave endless comments,’ but there has not been an olive branch offered to parents on this topic,” said the mother who removed her children from Nova Classical Academy over the events. “So when we saw that there’s not a negotiation process—this is what’s going to happen—I was worried about my kids and I got tired of worrying about my kids.” The second parent said: “The other side basically didn’t want us to have a voice, calling everything we say hateful or discriminatory or both.” Williams suggested that a challenge Nova Classical Academy faces is being a public charter school. As such, the school must adhere to its charter, which includes a “long-held commitment to transparent governance.” Because of this, debate over the school’s proposed gender inclusion policy has been uncomfortably public. “Transparency allows divergent views to be made public,” Williams said. “We need to protect freedom of expression and we need to protect our students from bullying in school by other students and by anyone else. When it comes to things people say, we don’t always succeed in striking this balance.” This report has been modified to clarify that the children’s book “I Am Jazz,” not the reality TV show of the same name focused on the same transgender girl, was proposed for use by the school.
This is the trend from the progressives, divide and conquer - class warfare. Democrats have always used class warfare as a club to gain advantage. If the progressives can convince enough women that that are victims of wage discrimination, or any other type of hold that society places on their collective success in the market place, the progressive democrats like Hillary can gain political ground wouldn't necessarily be available without rhetoric that creates conflict and chaos.
As we have heard many times from such stalwart democrats like Rohm Emanuel, ''We should let a crisis go to waste. We can accomplish a lot of things would wouldn't be able to do otherwise". So if a crisis and chaos works well to manipulate the masses, why not create a crisis for political gain?
Isn't this the bed rock of progressive socialist liberal politics, misinformation and deception?
Debunking the Wage Gap: We Are Not Victims Penny Young Nance / @PYNance /
We have so many opportunities in the workforce, yet women are often still told that we’ve got to run ourselves ragged and forego balance in order to break through the glass ceiling. Why? Part of the reason work-life balance is difficult to achieve is because our society places so much weight on the financial success of one’s career.
For women, this has been particularly difficult because of the claim that we are underpaid compared with men and the notion that we have to work twice as hard to get to a level playing field. The ubiquitous statistic that women earn 77 cents for every dollar men earn is a compelling story that points to systemic discrimination against women. The problem is that it’s untrue. In reality, in our 20s women are paid better than men—by 8 cents on the dollar. And overall, 72 percent of women say they have about the same opportunities to advance to top executive and professional positions in their companies as men. We are now as likely as men to be company managers.
Now, it is true that on average men earn more than women, and they also hold a greater number of executive positions. Yet this wage gap is usually not the product of workplace discrimination but rather is the product of the choices and needs of both women and men. Here’s a radical thought: Women are different than men, and our priorities, demands, and career paths differ in most cases because of our own choosing.
When we take into account things like education, hours worked, industry, experience, and career choice, the wage gap disappears. Rather than pitting men and women against each other and using simplistic numbers to suggest that women are victims, we ought to acknowledge these differences and embrace the choices we make, understanding the different salaries that may result.
For instance, most women today prefer not to work full time while their children are growing up. This decision naturally slows our workplace trajectory and can decrease our wages when we do return, particularly when you take into account that only 40 percent of women who take time off for children re-enter full-time work.
Women also work fewer hours than men on average—thirty-five minutes less per day than men among full-time workers—often due to the fact that mothers voluntarily provide more time at home caring for children. I understand this desire to be home with our children; the bond of motherhood is the strongest emotion I have ever experienced. Feminism refuses to acknowledge and validate this option.
Additionally, women are more likely to be teachers and men are more likely to work in finance. Women also tend to choose jobs that offer more regular hours and greater flexibility—jobs that can accommodate the demands of raising children and managing other familial demands, but which may pay less.
We don’t all have to be on a path to the Fortune 500. I am so encouraged by the fact that as women gain greater opportunities in the workplace, they are choosing to enter careers that interest them, even if many of these careers have lower earnings over the long run. We absolutely should encourage girls in the fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). In the past there has not been enough emphasis on this opportunity, and we can do better. I also believe that it should still be their choice.
Perhaps more opportunities for girls and boys at the elementary school level will orient more women toward these fields, but for now we must acknowledge that women’s career choice is a factor that affects the wage gap—and that giving women choice without guilt isn’t a bad thing. As long as women recognize the financial implications of their career choices, I say, “Good for them!” No one should choose a career based on money alone. There’s not enough money in the world to compensate for a job you hate. I encourage women to choose a career they love, as long as it’s honest work and pays the bills. They should also look at all their options. We often limit ourselves.
Now, all of this is not to say that some fields are still difficult for women to break into or that there aren’t bad bosses. Humans are still sinful, and therefore discrimination against women does still exist.
However, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Pregnancy Discrimination Act have given us recourse in the courts and act as a deterrent to unfair employers. Concerned Women for America recently filed an amicus brief in support of a woman who was discriminated against by UPS because of her pregnancy, and she won. We have legal recourse, and we should use it if we are wronged—including and perhaps especially when it comes to sexual harassment.
I experienced sexual harassment in one job as a twentysomething, and it was disgusting and humiliating. I was highly employable and therefore sought and got another job, but sexual harassment is intolerable. Our daughters should never have to put up with that nonsense—and thankfully they don’t have to. We are blessed in this country by equal protection under the law, something women in much of the world can still only dream about.
Overall, the insistence on a wage gap and on widespread discrimination against women is sometimes used by feminists to perpetuate the notion that patriarchy prevents us from attaining career success and equity with men. Victim bating is politically profitable for feminists, but it simply doesn’t hold up. While choices we make about motherhood, work hours, and industry sectors may hinder our corporate-track momentum or stall our wages for a period of time, they are also opening up avenues to a work-life balance that is manageable and allows us to flourish. Taken from Feisty & Feminine by Penny Young Nance. Copyright 2016 by Penny Young Nance. Used by permission of Zondervan. www.zondervan.com.
All this seems so easy to understand, and yet the connection is missed completely by millions of citizens.
That most large cities that are headed for default, bankruptcy are under the control, and have been for decades, by democrats.
It's clear democrats are not capable of understanding the human conditions other then how to manipulate it their advantage.
As in Detroit, it went into default, and now it's under bankruptcy procedures to try and rejuvenate that city, but even if the city finds some new life to build on for new generations to have prosperity, it is assured it will fail again as there is little or no hope that the progressive democrats that have controlled this once great city for generations will move away when they see the chance to steal any success that the citizen might enjoy. It's in their DNA of all real progressive democrats. It's their nature to take advantage of others for their own personal gain. Creating chaos and havoc is their calling.
Is it just evil or is it just who they are, always have been and always will be?
The situation is clear for all to see, if you control speech you control the narrative. And if you control the narrative you control the situation. Simple and easy. You can say what ever you want as long as you agree with the existing ideology and agenda. Other wise, shut up and go away, or worse as the case with the Marquette University professor that was fired for siding with a student that thought free speech was needed to have an intelligent debate on same sex marriage.
And as we have discussed on many past occasions, the existing university ideology and agenda is progressive socialism, extreme left liberalism or worse, a Marxist indoctrination program.
For parents sending their children off to get a higher education that will sustain them for the rest of their lives, and given this college and university atmosphere of a progressive liberalist atmosphere of forced indoctrination, they see little to hope for of find a school that will provide a academic climate that will produce at defined curriculum to educate their young for success, instead what they might get is an education that prepares the student for a campaign for socialist "transformation" and hate for the American society in general. This is nothing new but that doesn't mean the battle for free speech is over, it's just begun in earnest. Need proof, check out the university of Missouri, and how that schools freshman enrollment has dropped more then 27% due to the insanity of progressive liberalism, Marxism, that we all saw play- out on national television. Alumni donations have dropped significantly as well, by the $millions.
The control of the narrative can cut both ways.
Guy Benson: The Assault on Free Speech Marches On Genevieve Wood /@genevievewood/
The political season has brought a fresh wave of free speech debates on America’s college campuses. Some students claim they need to be “protected” from even seeing the names of presidential candidates they don’t like.
Fox News commentator Guy Benson, also the co-author of “End of Discussion,” sat down with The Daily Signal to discuss the latest round of attacks on free speech and how they are increasingly preventing students from engaging in real intellectual debates.
I'm an American citizen and I love this country that has given me everything. I believe that America is the last hope in this world for Democracy and Freedom. She must be defended at all costs!
