Here is a list of Opinionated Blogs ordered by Last Commented, posted by members. A Blog is a journal you may enter about your life, thoughts, interesting experiences, or lessons you've learned. Post an opinion, impart words of wisdom, or talk about something interesting in your day. Update your blog on a regular basis, or just whenever you have something to say. Creating a blog is a good way to share something of yourself with others. Reading blogs is a good way to learn more about others. Click here to post a blog.
There goes the neighbourhood
so how many of yeah wanna be all right abought everything with your opinion
***
Video evidence at hand and you are just too blind or ignorant to see.
***
an little *** worries about his little kindergarten feelings getting hurt cause I busted him in his continuation of his bullshite, an loving to pick on people calling them down. You've been busted and called out, who the phoque do you think you are
***
Oh I'm so sorry. I didn't know there was a rule that blogs can only be posted if you approve of them. I'll try to be more careful next time.
NOT!
How about this novel idea my little dictatorial friend:
You post what you are interested in and I'll post what I am interested in.
***
I'm surprised you haven't figured that out by now. After all you do think you're smarter than most.
***
Yup big - he's a fart smeller, awright
***
GOD PUT TRUMP IN OFFICE & YOU CAN’T STOP WHAT GOD HAS ORDAINED!
***
(in response to "I can't write this with a straight face") Then I suggest you attempt it with the fat, ugly one you are currently using.
****
(bloggers) instead have this deranged compulsion to read it and then writhe in agony?These people are truly mental cases.
My point? I don’t have a point. People cherry-pick offence from everything I say, so I have instead copy/pasted comments from current blogs. One of them had been addressed to me, the others are neighbourly chitchat.
***
Video evidence at hand and you are just too blind or ignorant to see.
***
an little *** worries about his little kindergarten feelings getting hurt cause I busted him in his continuation of his bullshite, an loving to pick on people calling them down. You've been busted and called out, who the phoque do you think you are
***
Oh I'm so sorry. I didn't know there was a rule that blogs can only be posted if you approve of them. I'll try to be more careful next time.
NOT!
How about this novel idea my little dictatorial friend:
You post what you are interested in and I'll post what I am interested in.
***
I'm surprised you haven't figured that out by now. After all you do think you're smarter than most.
***
Yup big - he's a fart smeller, awright
***
GOD PUT TRUMP IN OFFICE & YOU CAN’T STOP WHAT GOD HAS ORDAINED!
***
(in response to "I can't write this with a straight face") Then I suggest you attempt it with the fat, ugly one you are currently using.
****
(bloggers) instead have this deranged compulsion to read it and then writhe in agony?These people are truly mental cases.
My point? I don’t have a point. People cherry-pick offence from everything I say, so I have instead copy/pasted comments from current blogs. One of them had been addressed to me, the others are neighbourly chitchat.
AG Barr gets attacked because his probe endangers powerful people
The only thing uglier than an angry Washington is a fearful Washington. And fear is what’s driving this week’s blitzkrieg of Attorney General William Barr.
Mr. Barr tolerantly sat through hours of Democratic insults at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing Wednesday. His reward for his patience was to be labeled, in the space of a news cycle, a lawbreaking, dishonest, obstructing hack. Speaker Nancy Pelosi publicly accused Mr. Barr of lying to Congress, which, she added, is “considered a crime.” House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler said he will move to hold Mr. Barr in contempt unless the attorney general acquiesces to the unprecedented demand that he submit to cross-examination by committee staff attorneys. James Comey, former director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, lamented that Donald Trump had “eaten” Mr. Barr’s “soul.” Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren demands the attorney general resign. California Rep. Eric Swalwell wants him impeached.
These attacks aren’t about special counsel Robert Mueller, his report or even the surreal debate over Mr. Barr’s first letter describing the report. The attorney general delivered the transparency Democrats demanded: He quickly released a lightly redacted report, which portrayed the president in a negative light. What do Democrats have to object to?
Some of this is frustration. Democrats foolishly invested two years of political capital in the idea that Mr. Mueller would prove President Trump had colluded with Russia, and Mr. Mueller left them empty-handed. Some of it is personal. Democrats resent that Mr. Barr won’t cower or apologize for doing his job. Some is bitterness that Mr. Barr is performing like a real attorney general, making the call against obstruction-of-justice charges rather than sitting back and letting Democrats have their fun with Mr. Mueller’s obstruction innuendo.
But most of it is likely fear. Mr. Barr made real news in that Senate hearing, and while the press didn’t notice, Democrats did. The attorney general said he’d already assigned people at the Justice Department to assist his investigation of the origins of the Trump-Russia probe. He said his review would be far-reaching – that he was obtaining details from congressional investigations, from the ongoing probe by the department’s inspector general, Michael Horowitz, and even from Mr. Mueller’s work. Mr. Barr said the investigation wouldn’t focus only on the fall 2016 justifications for secret surveillance warrants against Trump team members but would go back months earlier.
He also said he’d focus on the infamous “dossier” concocted by opposition-research firm Fusion GPS and British former spy Christopher Steele, on which the FBI relied so heavily in its probe. Mr. Barr acknowledged his concern that the dossier itself could be Russian disinformation, a possibility he described as not “entirely speculative.” He also revealed that the department has “multiple criminal leak investigations under way” into the disclosure of classified details about the Trump-Russia investigation.
Mr. Barr tolerantly sat through hours of Democratic insults at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing Wednesday. His reward for his patience was to be labeled, in the space of a news cycle, a lawbreaking, dishonest, obstructing hack. Speaker Nancy Pelosi publicly accused Mr. Barr of lying to Congress, which, she added, is “considered a crime.” House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler said he will move to hold Mr. Barr in contempt unless the attorney general acquiesces to the unprecedented demand that he submit to cross-examination by committee staff attorneys. James Comey, former director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, lamented that Donald Trump had “eaten” Mr. Barr’s “soul.” Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren demands the attorney general resign. California Rep. Eric Swalwell wants him impeached.
These attacks aren’t about special counsel Robert Mueller, his report or even the surreal debate over Mr. Barr’s first letter describing the report. The attorney general delivered the transparency Democrats demanded: He quickly released a lightly redacted report, which portrayed the president in a negative light. What do Democrats have to object to?
Some of this is frustration. Democrats foolishly invested two years of political capital in the idea that Mr. Mueller would prove President Trump had colluded with Russia, and Mr. Mueller left them empty-handed. Some of it is personal. Democrats resent that Mr. Barr won’t cower or apologize for doing his job. Some is bitterness that Mr. Barr is performing like a real attorney general, making the call against obstruction-of-justice charges rather than sitting back and letting Democrats have their fun with Mr. Mueller’s obstruction innuendo.
But most of it is likely fear. Mr. Barr made real news in that Senate hearing, and while the press didn’t notice, Democrats did. The attorney general said he’d already assigned people at the Justice Department to assist his investigation of the origins of the Trump-Russia probe. He said his review would be far-reaching – that he was obtaining details from congressional investigations, from the ongoing probe by the department’s inspector general, Michael Horowitz, and even from Mr. Mueller’s work. Mr. Barr said the investigation wouldn’t focus only on the fall 2016 justifications for secret surveillance warrants against Trump team members but would go back months earlier.
He also said he’d focus on the infamous “dossier” concocted by opposition-research firm Fusion GPS and British former spy Christopher Steele, on which the FBI relied so heavily in its probe. Mr. Barr acknowledged his concern that the dossier itself could be Russian disinformation, a possibility he described as not “entirely speculative.” He also revealed that the department has “multiple criminal leak investigations under way” into the disclosure of classified details about the Trump-Russia investigation.
Trump says he's looking to ship illegal immigrants to sanctuary cities
President Trump said Friday that he is considering a plan to release illegal immigrants into sanctuary cities, saying it is fitting punishment for Democrat-led communities that refuse to get tough on border security.
Mr. Trump was confirming a report in The Washington Post that said the idea was being considered.
“Due to the fact that Democrats are unwilling to change our very dangerous immigration laws, we are indeed, as reported, giving strong considerations to placing Illegal Immigrants in Sanctuary Cities only,” the president said on Twitter.
He chided Democrats for their weaker immigration security policies, and said his move to send the migrants to sanctuaries “should make them very happy!”
Sanctuary cities are communities that refuse to cooperate with federal immigration authorities, shielding them from detection to varying degrees. California, for example, has enacted laws that ended cooperation between local police and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement on a number of areas including anti-gang efforts and translation assistance.
Democrats bristled at Mr. Trump’s suggestion.
“It is a notion that is unworthy of the presidency of the United States and disrespectful,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told reporters.
Thousands of illegal immigrant children and families are being nabbed at the border every day and, because of lax U.S. laws, most of them are quickly released. That usually means being driven to a bus station in a city near the border and dropped off, leaving the migrants to disperse on their own or with the help of nonprofit organizations that are rushing to help.
Some of those communities have complained about being overwhelmed by the releases.
Mr. Trump didn’t say what exactly he’s considering, but one option would be to transport the illegal immigrants caught at the border to sanctuary jurisdictions elsewhere, spreading the impact of the releases beyond the border.
Court documents detailing illegal immigration show some migrants already gravitate toward sanctuary communities, seeking out the more generous treatment such as ability to obtain government services and driver’s licenses.
Others will end up traveling to where they have family or friends or the hope of a job, and if they were released into sanctuary cities they would likely leave for their original destinations.
Mr. Trump was confirming a report in The Washington Post that said the idea was being considered.
“Due to the fact that Democrats are unwilling to change our very dangerous immigration laws, we are indeed, as reported, giving strong considerations to placing Illegal Immigrants in Sanctuary Cities only,” the president said on Twitter.
He chided Democrats for their weaker immigration security policies, and said his move to send the migrants to sanctuaries “should make them very happy!”
Sanctuary cities are communities that refuse to cooperate with federal immigration authorities, shielding them from detection to varying degrees. California, for example, has enacted laws that ended cooperation between local police and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement on a number of areas including anti-gang efforts and translation assistance.
Democrats bristled at Mr. Trump’s suggestion.
“It is a notion that is unworthy of the presidency of the United States and disrespectful,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told reporters.
Thousands of illegal immigrant children and families are being nabbed at the border every day and, because of lax U.S. laws, most of them are quickly released. That usually means being driven to a bus station in a city near the border and dropped off, leaving the migrants to disperse on their own or with the help of nonprofit organizations that are rushing to help.
Some of those communities have complained about being overwhelmed by the releases.
Mr. Trump didn’t say what exactly he’s considering, but one option would be to transport the illegal immigrants caught at the border to sanctuary jurisdictions elsewhere, spreading the impact of the releases beyond the border.
Court documents detailing illegal immigration show some migrants already gravitate toward sanctuary communities, seeking out the more generous treatment such as ability to obtain government services and driver’s licenses.
Others will end up traveling to where they have family or friends or the hope of a job, and if they were released into sanctuary cities they would likely leave for their original destinations.
In Venezuela we are witnessing what happens when you disarm a nation's citizens.
Take a long, hard look at what's happening in the streets of Venezuela. Only the socialist dictator and his goons have guns. This is why we must protect our right to bear arms at any cost.
Even liberal MSNBC Accidentally Makes Strong Case For Second Amendment While Discussing Venezuela
MSNBC reporter Kerry Sanders accidentally made a strong case for the Second Amendment on Tuesday during a segment on the far-left network about the chaos in Venezuela.
Sanders noted that Maduro still maintained control of the military through the whole ordeal, adding: "You have to understand, in Venezuela gun ownership is not something that's open to everybody. So if the military have the guns, they have the power and as long as Nicolás Maduro controls the military, he controls the country."
Sanders comments came after an armored Venezuelan military vehicle plowed into a crowd of protesters earlier in the day in a video clip that went viral and was seen around the world.
Even liberal MSNBC Accidentally Makes Strong Case For Second Amendment While Discussing Venezuela
MSNBC reporter Kerry Sanders accidentally made a strong case for the Second Amendment on Tuesday during a segment on the far-left network about the chaos in Venezuela.
Sanders noted that Maduro still maintained control of the military through the whole ordeal, adding: "You have to understand, in Venezuela gun ownership is not something that's open to everybody. So if the military have the guns, they have the power and as long as Nicolás Maduro controls the military, he controls the country."
Sanders comments came after an armored Venezuelan military vehicle plowed into a crowd of protesters earlier in the day in a video clip that went viral and was seen around the world.
Tax
Tax his land,
Tax his bed,
Tax the table,
At which he's fed.
Tax his tractor,
Tax his mule,
Teach him taxes
Are the rule.
Tax his work,
Tax his pay,
He works for
peanuts anyway!
Tax his cow,
Tax his goat,
Tax his pants,
Tax his coat.
Tax his ties,
Tax his shirt,
Tax his work,
Tax his dirt.
Tax his tobacco,
Tax his drink,
Tax him if he
Tries to think.
Tax his cigars,
Tax his beers,
If he cries
Tax his tears.
Tax his car,
Tax his gas,
Find other ways
To tax his a**.
Tax all he has
Then let him know
That you won't be done
Till he has no dough.
When he screams and hollers;
Then tax him some more,
Tax him till
He's good and sore.
Then tax his coffin,
Tax his grave,
Tax the sod in
Which he's laid...
Put these words
Upon his tomb,
'Taxes drove me
to my doom...'
When he's gone,
Do not relax,
Its time to apply
The inheritance tax.
Anonymous
With an obvious reference to the Beatles song 'Taxman'
Accounts Receivable Tax
Building Permit Tax
CDL license Tax
Cigarette Tax
Corporate Income Tax
Dog License Tax
Excise Taxes
Federal Income Tax
Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA)
Fishing License Tax
Food License Tax
Fuel Permit Tax
Gasoline Tax (currently 44.75 cents per gallon)
Gross Receipts Tax
Hunting License Tax
Inheritance Tax
Inventory Tax
IRS Interest Charges IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax)
Liquor Tax
Luxury Taxes
Marriage License Tax
Medicare Tax
Personal Property Tax
Property Tax
Real Estate Tax
Service Charge Tax
Social Security Tax
Road Usage Tax
Recreational Vehicle Tax
Sales Tax
School Tax
State Income Tax
State Unemployment Tax (SUTA)
Telephone Federal Excise Tax
Telephone Federal Universal Service Fee Tax
Telephone Federal, State and Local Surcharge Taxes
Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge Tax
Telephone Recurring and Nonrecurring Charges Tax
Telephone State and Local Tax
Telephone Usage Charge Tax
Utility Taxes
Vehicle License Registration Tax
Vehicle Sales Tax
Watercraft Registration Tax
Well Permit Tax
Workers Compensation Tax
STILL THINK THIS IS FUNNY?
Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago, & our nation was the most prosperous in the world. We had absolutely no national debt, had the largest middle class in the world, and Mom stayed home to raise the kids.
What in the heck happened? Can you spell 'politicians?'
Tax his bed,
Tax the table,
At which he's fed.
Tax his tractor,
Tax his mule,
Teach him taxes
Are the rule.
Tax his work,
Tax his pay,
He works for
peanuts anyway!
Tax his cow,
Tax his goat,
Tax his pants,
Tax his coat.
Tax his ties,
Tax his shirt,
Tax his work,
Tax his dirt.
Tax his tobacco,
Tax his drink,
Tax him if he
Tries to think.
Tax his cigars,
Tax his beers,
If he cries
Tax his tears.
Tax his car,
Tax his gas,
Find other ways
To tax his a**.
Tax all he has
Then let him know
That you won't be done
Till he has no dough.
When he screams and hollers;
Then tax him some more,
Tax him till
He's good and sore.
Then tax his coffin,
Tax his grave,
Tax the sod in
Which he's laid...
Put these words
Upon his tomb,
'Taxes drove me
to my doom...'
When he's gone,
Do not relax,
Its time to apply
The inheritance tax.
Anonymous
With an obvious reference to the Beatles song 'Taxman'
Accounts Receivable Tax
Building Permit Tax
CDL license Tax
Cigarette Tax
Corporate Income Tax
Dog License Tax
Excise Taxes
Federal Income Tax
Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA)
Fishing License Tax
Food License Tax
Fuel Permit Tax
Gasoline Tax (currently 44.75 cents per gallon)
Gross Receipts Tax
Hunting License Tax
Inheritance Tax
Inventory Tax
IRS Interest Charges IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax)
Liquor Tax
Luxury Taxes
Marriage License Tax
Medicare Tax
Personal Property Tax
Property Tax
Real Estate Tax
Service Charge Tax
Social Security Tax
Road Usage Tax
Recreational Vehicle Tax
Sales Tax
School Tax
State Income Tax
State Unemployment Tax (SUTA)
Telephone Federal Excise Tax
Telephone Federal Universal Service Fee Tax
Telephone Federal, State and Local Surcharge Taxes
Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge Tax
Telephone Recurring and Nonrecurring Charges Tax
Telephone State and Local Tax
Telephone Usage Charge Tax
Utility Taxes
Vehicle License Registration Tax
Vehicle Sales Tax
Watercraft Registration Tax
Well Permit Tax
Workers Compensation Tax
STILL THINK THIS IS FUNNY?
Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago, & our nation was the most prosperous in the world. We had absolutely no national debt, had the largest middle class in the world, and Mom stayed home to raise the kids.
What in the heck happened? Can you spell 'politicians?'
CNN
Saw this on Twitter:
Dear CNN viewers:
Everything they told you is a lie.
Trump will not go to prison.
Trump will not be impeached.
Trump will get reelected.
There were traitors.
They will be indicted.
They all worked for Obama.
Some are employed by CNN.
CHANGE THE CHANNEL.
You're welcome.
Dear CNN viewers:
Everything they told you is a lie.
Trump will not go to prison.
Trump will not be impeached.
Trump will get reelected.
There were traitors.
They will be indicted.
They all worked for Obama.
Some are employed by CNN.
CHANGE THE CHANNEL.
You're welcome.
online today!
The Silent Coup To Oust Trump
Was An Thinly Veiled Attempt To Overturn The '16 Election.
It is well for the Office Of The Presidency (not merely this sitting President) and the Checks & Balances designed into U.S. Constitutional government that this Banana Republic-esque coup d'etat failed.
It is well for the Office Of The Presidency (not merely this sitting President) and the Checks & Balances designed into U.S. Constitutional government that this Banana Republic-esque coup d'etat failed.
6 Questions for Congress to ask Barr during testimony (from Washington Post)
In response to:
6 questions Congress should ask Attorney General Barr about the Mueller report
Attorney General William P. Barr is set to testify before Congress this week. (Anna Moneymaker/Bloomberg)
By Amber Phillips
May 1 at 6:00 AM
Attorney General William P. Barr is testifying before Congress on Wednesday for the first time since he released special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s report last month. And lawmakers have a lot of questions for him.
Barr’s testimony is highly anticipated. Experts say it could help us understand some key decisions made by the Justice Department about the Mueller report. The special counsel’s report on Russian election interference was much more damaging to President Trump than Barr originally let on, raising questions among legal experts and Democrats about where Barr’s loyalties lie. Mueller himself was upset with how Barr characterized the report to the public.
Barr will be speaking Wednesday to a Republican-controlled committee in the Senate. (He is also scheduled to testify Thursday before a Democratic-controlled committee in the House, but he’s arguing over format and threatening not to attend.)
Here are six questions that legal experts say Congress must ask:
1. Why did you originally indicate that Mueller was conflicted on whether Trump obstructed justice?
In a letter summarizing the report weeks before it was released, Barr underscored how Mueller laid out evidence on “both sides” of whether the president was guilty of a crime. This gave the impression that Mueller was conflicted. But that’s not really true, as The Fix’s Aaron Blake notes.
Mueller spent significant time detailing how the president, in his words, tried to “control” the independent investigation. The report outlines 10 instances in which Trump tried to add roadblocks or even end it altogether by firing Mueller. Rather than being conflicted about Trump’s intent to commit a crime, Mueller appeared to be hindered by Justice Department guidelines that you can’t indict a sitting president.
“There is now public confusion about critical aspects of the results of our investigation,” Mueller wrote to Barr after the summary was released.
2. Why did you think it was your responsibility to make the ultimate decision about whether to prosecute the president for obstruction of justice?
As Jessica Levinson, a professor at Loyola Law School, notes, Mueller determined he didn’t have authority to recommend charging Trump with a crime, but that Congress could. In fact, the report strongly suggests Mueller thinks Congress should do something about it.
The conclusion that Congress may apply the obstruction laws to the President’s corrupt exercise of the powers of office accords with our constitutional system of checks and balances and the principle that no person is above the law.
Instead, Barr publicly said he wouldn’t be charging Trump with obstruction of justice, weeks before he released the report. That left plenty of time for Trump and his allies to form the incorrect narrative that the Mueller report exonerated him.
6 questions Congress should ask Attorney General Barr about the Mueller report
Attorney General William P. Barr is set to testify before Congress this week. (Anna Moneymaker/Bloomberg)
By Amber Phillips
May 1 at 6:00 AM
Attorney General William P. Barr is testifying before Congress on Wednesday for the first time since he released special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s report last month. And lawmakers have a lot of questions for him.
Barr’s testimony is highly anticipated. Experts say it could help us understand some key decisions made by the Justice Department about the Mueller report. The special counsel’s report on Russian election interference was much more damaging to President Trump than Barr originally let on, raising questions among legal experts and Democrats about where Barr’s loyalties lie. Mueller himself was upset with how Barr characterized the report to the public.
Barr will be speaking Wednesday to a Republican-controlled committee in the Senate. (He is also scheduled to testify Thursday before a Democratic-controlled committee in the House, but he’s arguing over format and threatening not to attend.)
Here are six questions that legal experts say Congress must ask:
1. Why did you originally indicate that Mueller was conflicted on whether Trump obstructed justice?
In a letter summarizing the report weeks before it was released, Barr underscored how Mueller laid out evidence on “both sides” of whether the president was guilty of a crime. This gave the impression that Mueller was conflicted. But that’s not really true, as The Fix’s Aaron Blake notes.
Mueller spent significant time detailing how the president, in his words, tried to “control” the independent investigation. The report outlines 10 instances in which Trump tried to add roadblocks or even end it altogether by firing Mueller. Rather than being conflicted about Trump’s intent to commit a crime, Mueller appeared to be hindered by Justice Department guidelines that you can’t indict a sitting president.
“There is now public confusion about critical aspects of the results of our investigation,” Mueller wrote to Barr after the summary was released.
2. Why did you think it was your responsibility to make the ultimate decision about whether to prosecute the president for obstruction of justice?
As Jessica Levinson, a professor at Loyola Law School, notes, Mueller determined he didn’t have authority to recommend charging Trump with a crime, but that Congress could. In fact, the report strongly suggests Mueller thinks Congress should do something about it.
The conclusion that Congress may apply the obstruction laws to the President’s corrupt exercise of the powers of office accords with our constitutional system of checks and balances and the principle that no person is above the law.
Instead, Barr publicly said he wouldn’t be charging Trump with obstruction of justice, weeks before he released the report. That left plenty of time for Trump and his allies to form the incorrect narrative that the Mueller report exonerated him.
(Continued in my first comment below)
Job seeking
someone can help me to find a job overseas across boarderlines????? Please i need your help
The Lesson Of A Pencil
Milton Friedman uses a pencil to illustrate how the free market price system promotes cooperation and harmony among those with no common interest.
A Blog is a journal you may enter about your life, your thoughts, interesting experiences, or lessons you have learned. It's your own page on Connecting Singles that you can update on a regular basis, or just whenever you have something to say. You can write about an opinion, impart words of wisdom, or talk about something interesting in your day. Creating a blog is a good way to share something of yourself with Connecting Singles members. Reading blogs is a good way to learn more about members you have met here. Please be sure to read the blog rules before posting.
Would YOU like to post a blog on Connecting Singles? Have you written blogs that you'd like to share with other members? Posting your blogs shows your skill and creativity and helps members get to know you better. Your blog will appear on the Connecting Singles Blogs page and also in a link on your profile page. Click here to post a blog »