Attention Ning Management,
Ning user "Walter R. Steiner" is in violation of one of the number one rules of discussion boards:
Flooding
He's flooded both the Discussion Forum and the Comment Wall to the point that The Rant is unusable:
If you're curious as to why, I'm told it's because of the most recent factual posts that go against his ideology some of which are included below. these posts are 100% in compliance with the rules of The Rant.
This is a policy issue which is why I posted it on the main board since if effects all especially new comers. If it's Ning's policy to allow flooding on The Rant which is not tolerated on the main board thus preventing actual discussions, so be it, just let us know so we won't waste our time posting on The Rant and users such as Walter R. Steiner can continue their temper tantrums ad infinitum.
Keep up the good work, Ning has until this point been 100%!
With kind regards
*
Another serious blow to the Democrat party and the media
Another serious blow to the Democrat party and the media
It all began with a lie from Democrat Senator Nancy Pelosi. Here's the most prolific quote in the article:
"Rarely do we see a reporter or anchor ask a lawmaker the tough, challenging question, “What laws, specifically, have been broken? Can you identify a precise statute?” The answer would be a deafening silence."
Note: I rarely quote Fox News however it appears that they're the only media outlet covering the facts in this case by referencing the constitution and the FEC laws. To date we still have Democrat senators calling for Trump Jr to testify under oath before congress all because of this lie, that's how far off the Democrats and media are.
It makes one ponder, are the politicians and media clueless or do they wield such enormous power over their constituents and viewers respectively that they continue to successfully get away with this practice of riding on lies?
Gregg Jarrett: Donald Trump Jr. did not violate campaign laws -- Pelosi and others are wrong
The law is common sense. Yet, it is created by lawmakers who seem to be lacking any sense at all. Many of them do not understand their own laws.
Nancy Pelosi recently proved this point. The House Minority Leader held a news conference, surrounded by like-minded Democrats, during which she declared that Donald Trump Jr. had broken campaign laws when he met with a Russian lawyer during last year’s presidential campaign to obtain negative information on the Democratic nominee, Hillary Clinton. Here is what Pelosi said:
“This is a campaign violation: soliciting, coordinating, or accepting something of value --opposition research, documents, and information—from a foreign national. Plain and simple.”
In truth, it is plain and simple that Pelosi is wrong. And so are many others who have joined the chorus of condemnation based on laws they have surely never read. Allow me to help them out.
The Federal Election Commission is the independent regulatory agency which enforces campaign laws enacted by Congress. On its government website, the FEC makes it clear that it is perfectly lawful for foreign nationals to be involved in American political campaigns:
“Even though a foreign national cannot make campaign contributions, he or she can serve as an uncompensated volunteer for a campaign or political party”.
The Commission goes on to explain that foreigners are “allowed to attend campaign strategy meetings and events”. They are allowed to contribute ideas, information, and even advice. They are allowed to open their mouths and speak.
None of this is considered to be a donation or “anything of value” under the campaign statutes, as some Democrats and many in the media allege. To the contrary, the Commission specifically states, “an individual may volunteer his or her personal services to a campaign without making a campaign contribution”.
The same language is found in both the Federal Election Campaign Act (52 USC 30101 8-B) and the Code of Federal Regulations (100.74):
“The value of services provided by any individual who volunteers on behalf of a candidate or political committee is not a contribution.”
Why are foreigners on American soil allowed to volunteer their services and provide information to political campaigns in U.S. elections? The reason should be obvious –the Constitution.
The First Amendment gives Americans the freedom to associate with whomever they want, including Russians. It gives people the freedom to exchange ideas and information , even with Russians. As long as the information is neither stolen nor classified, there is no crime. There is no civil wrong.
We do not criminalize free speech and free association in America. Yet, there is this false mentality that all Russians are boogeymen. And talking to them is somehow a crime. It is not. The founders of our Constitution would be mortified at that notion.
One commentator recently said, “Donald Trump Jr. had an absolute duty to notify the FBI”. Why? Where is that law or duty written? If it is not a crime to exchange information with a Russian, why should the FBI be notified? Why would FBI agents be interested in legal activity? Trust me, they are not. Even if a citizen learns of a crime, there is no affirmative duty imposed by law to report it to law enforcement.
Talking with a Russian and gathering information is not a crime. Yet Pelosi and others allege that the president’s son may also be guilty of conspiracies to commit espionage and defraud the government.
As explained in an earlier column, the Trump Jr. meeting is not treason because we are not at war with Russia. It is not collusion in any criminal sense, because that only applies to anti-trust cases. It is not conspiracy to defraud the government, because the statute requires deceit and dishonesty. And it is not a violation of election laws, because foreign nationals are specifically permitted to volunteer personal services and information to political campaigns. As for espionage…seriously? What U.S. secrets or classified information is Pelosi talking about?
Democrats and even some Republicans, like Gov. Chris Christie, are perpetuating the myth that laws must have been broken without ever knowing or studying the law. And many in the media are so ignorant of basic laws and oblivious to the Constitution, they are complicit in misinforming the public.
Rarely do we see a reporter or anchor ask a lawmaker the tough, challenging question, “What laws, specifically, have been broken? Can you identify a precise statute?” The answer would be a deafening silence.
Our Constitution was never intended to embody a political point of view. It was made for people of fundamentally differing views. Unfortunately, those in Washington who should know that… do not.
And the media, which owes its existence to that esteemed document, seem to have forgotten its precious guarantees of freedom.
Gregg Jarrett is a Fox News Anchor and former defense attorney.
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/07/24/gregg-jarrett-donald-trum...
*
60% of Canadians have private insurance
60% of Canadians have private insurance
Why? Doesn't Canada have "free" socialized health care?
Because the government "care" does not cover prescription drugs, dentists, eye exams, hearing aids, private hospital rooms, psychologists, counselors, physiotherapists, cosmetic surgery and tests required for immigration papers, driver’s licences and insurance.
Because the wait times for government "care" are far too long, often months for surgeries such as knee replacements.
Are you one of the 875,000 Canadians on a waiting list for medical care? Are you aware that private healthcare in Canada & the U.S. is not as expensive as you may think?
http://timelymedical.ca/
60% of Canadians have private health insurance to pay for better care than the government system allows and to cover items not covered by the government, including prescription drugs, eye exams, mental health, and dentistry.
http://www.vancouversun.com/health/Guide+Private+health+insurance/1...
In Canada, a move towards private health care
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-healthcare-can...
Canada's Private Clinics Surge as Public System Falters
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/28/international/americas/28canada.h...
*
Richard Branson is privatizing UK's health care
Richard Branson is privatizing UK's health care
Sir Richard Branson’s health firm, Virgin Care, has won a £700m contract to deliver 200 types of NHS and social care services to more than 200,000 people in Bath and north-east Somerset.
The contract, which was approved on Thursday, has sparked new fears about private health firms expanding their role in the provision of publicly funded health services.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/nov/11/virgin-care-700m-co...
UK government accelerates privatisation of National Health Service
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2016/11/17/priv-n17.html
Government policy and privatisation mean the NHS as we know it will be gone in as little as five years if no one speaks up
In the past two years, £11bn worth of our NHS has been put up for sale, while 35,000 staff have been axed, including 5,600 nurses. Half of our 600 ambulance stations are earmarked for closure. One-third of NHS walk-in centres have been closed and 10% of A&E units have been shut. Waiting lists for operations are at their longest in years as hospitals are consumed by the crisis in A&E.
http://www.theguardian.com/healthcare-network/2014/jan/08/nhs-extin...
Health Secretary Andrew Lansley’s Health and Social Care Bill proposes to give GPs control over large parts of the NHS budget and introduce greater levels of competition from the private sector across the service.
http://www.journallive.co.uk/north-east-news/todays-news/2012/03/10...
Devon NHS children's services set for privatisation
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/mar/15/devon-nhs-childrens-s...
Why the trend towards privatization?
The babies born in hospital corridors: Bed shortage forces 4,000 mothers to give birth in lifts, offices and hospital toilets
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1209034/The-babies-born-hos...
Hip replacements, cataract surgery and tonsil removal are among operations now being rationed in a bid to save the NHS money.
Two-thirds of health trusts in England are rationing treatments for "non-urgent" conditions as part of the drive to reduce costs in the NHS by £20bn over the next four years. One in three primary-care trusts (PCTs) has expanded the list of procedures it will restrict funding to in the past 12 months.
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-...
In a letter to The Daily Telegraph, a group of experts who care for the terminally ill claim that some patients are being wrongly judged as close to death.
Under NHS guidance introduced across England to help doctors and medical staff deal with dying patients, they can then have fluid and drugs withdrawn and many are put on continuous sedation until they pass away.
The warning comes just a week after a report by the Patients Association estimated that up to one million patients had received poor or cruel care on the NHS.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/6127514/Sentenced-to-d...
*
Replies