Have Republicans Truly, EVER Respected Women?

1) They do not respect women enough to let her make decisions about what happens to her body…..

2) They do not respect women enough to make sure that their own daughters have the same opportunity and earn the same pay as their sons and other men….

3) They do not respect women enough to give them the same affordable access  to health care and prenatal care and child are.

4) They vociferously opposed the equal rights amendment when it came before the states in the 1980s..

5) They oppose Title 9 protections giving female athletes the same funding as male athletes.

So fellow women.  This goes WAY beyond Donald Trump… You can thank him for bringing it out into the open so now women, all women, can do something to make it go away, at least in public, for good…..

It will take women to go D all the way down the ballot if they want to make the message resound across the next 6 generations…. Battle Cry is “this is the year of Women.  No Republicans… Period…”

(Unless you are in the 8th Senatorial District of Delaware, where Meredith Chapman is running against Dave Sokola, destroyer of education… OR in the 1st Senatorial District of Delaware, where James Spadola is running against Harris McDowell….  Both of these vehemently disavowed Trump. )  Please make these two the exceptions if you live in their district, but if you are a woman, or if you support women, make it D all the way down…

(No, it is not partisan.  It is about making sure the lesson sinks in and is finally learned…. )

.

Four Pillars Of Education

Child Safety —  Everything must be done to protect students and keep them safe and psychologically healthy.

Learning —  The brain learns on its own.  It learns what is most interesting to it.  If you put interesting books before it, it learns books. If you put interesting videos, it learns videos.  If an interesting student sits in front, it learns about that student. Learning cannot be measured except by a teacher who knows that child.

Social Engagement —  We are social animals…  We learn from each other.  The more different we are in a classroom, the more every one learns and a better and more stable society is seeded.  Schools need play time and time to allow socialization to naturally occur on its own.

Self confidence —  The sign of adult maturity is self confidence.  Confidence is built by becoming comfortable with one’s environment.  Those graduating should after 12 years be confident they have the tools they need to prosper as adults.

===========

These are the classical four pillars of education.  Originally formulated by the Greeks who themselves borrowed from many conquered civilizations.  In some ways they were wiser than us.  For just as we can learn and predict a computer game’s behavior by watching it over and over, they looked at human behavior over and over.   These are the four traits our founding fathers were given in their schooling.  These were the four traits the greatest generation grew strong upon.  These are what developed the Baby Boomers…

Ask yourself…. how does taking the Smarter Balanced Assessment augment and improve a student’s stature in any of these categories?

Now if teaching does instill them, and the Smarter Balanced takes away from teaching…. wouldn’t it make sense to get rid of the Smarter Balanced Assessment?

Questions Everyone Needs To Ask….

Why are we still taking the Smarter Balanced Assessment?

Why are we still teaching the bankrupt and odious Common Core?

Why have we not put the officers of Rodel in jail?

Please feel free to answer in the comments down below?

Why Do Police Only Cover Up White-On-Black Shootings In Only Republican States?

Florida and Missouri…

When was the last national murder outrage in a Democratic state? I think it was in the Republican enclave of LA, with Rodney King, in the otherwise Democratic state of California….

But I don’t know of any in New York. Vermont… Massachusetts…. Rhode Island…. Minnesota…. It always seems to take place in states that have lots and lots of Republicans…. like Missouri… and Florida…..

I don’t mean to cast disparagement upon all Republicans, but this is a puzzling conundrum… Why is it only Republican states that exist in such a state of dysfunction, that when someone murders a black, they get away with no criminal charges?

I think several generalities apply.

One, Republicans are just plain scared of black people. “Don’t get out of your car till he passes”..

Two, Republican philosophy stresses individuality as well as that a government’s rules and regulations should not apply to people and that everyone already in power should be allowed to do whatever it is they wish, because they are the “true” Americans and have a little flag patch on their upper sleeve to prove it….

Three, Republicans believe that having a gun, means killing something… What’s the point of being a policemen (or self-appointed vigilante) if you can’t kill your fellow human beings the Republican mentality goes. We saw it in Florida’s legislature. They throughly enjoyed and almost could not contain their rapture that their law, allowed for the public elimination of a black person. Almost it seemed that any means available to legally kill black people, especially if it gets around that inconvenient(to them) law that says, black people are equal to whites and deserve the same protections,… is something good….

Four, Republicans honestly feel blacks are not people… “Those darky things, over there..” they say. Republicans unlike Democrats, do not see blacks as their fellow brothers or sisters from a different mother…

Five, Republicans have an inflated sense of their own importance. If they tell you to stop, and you do, it gives them the right to shoot you dead… Sort of as in, “I’m SOOOOOOOOO IMPORTANT… I AM THE OMNIPOTENT AND CAN KILL PEOPLE WITH IMPUNITY. BUT IF I KILL WHITE PEOPLE, SOMEONE WILL BE MAD. HEY! BLACK PEOPLE DON’T MATTER. CAUSE ROMNEY, SAID SO…

I’ll stop there. Now keep in mind, not all Republicans feel that way. Chris Christie, for example, would agree exactly with everything I said, if he was talking about a fringe of his party… Because they are a fringe. Just like those clowns at Bundy’s ranch, those people who were too insane for mental internment so we gave them guns and banished them to a desert…. So I think all (even Republicans) can agree. It is this fringe that keeps biting all good Republicans in the ass… And we have to wonder why?

I think we can see the answer right here in Charlie Copeland, who is in charge of trying to mend a party that was shattered into single atoms, back into a viable political entity… In order to have any numbers promoting his self-respect, he has to cater to the fringe: those outlandish impostors who think they alone are a gift to all under-aged women… In Delaware, the far right fringe eliminated all viable Republicans from power. I believe that in other states, which due to their geography may be less Democratic, one encounters far more fringe elements and therefore, the party must due to their numbers, cater to their episodes of psychological dysfunction….

This allows the fringe to think they can act with impunity, and if they want to shoot a black person… what the heck. no one cares… stupid fool happened to show up while I was here… Oh look, he’s stopped running away and is putting his hands up? Good, let me get closer. Ok, he’s only 5 feet away, I can hit that. Let me empty this clip into his freaking big head… Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow. Pow… Ewww wow, neat “O”.. did you see how his head exploded with each hit and all that blood and meat shot everywhere… Cool… Wonder if there is another one I can still shoot?…

And that is my theory on why, white cops shooting underage black children, can only occur in states run by Republicans… Because there is no consequence. If you only said… the next black child who gets killed by a white police man, will cause all handguns, assault rifles, and miniature cannons to become illegal in the state of Missouri or Florida, then such incidents simply would never happen. For there would be real consequences then…. If in your capacity as a police officer you accidentally shot and killed a black child, the NRA would have you dead before the sun rose the next day.

Democrat Treasures Debate Tonight on WDEL 6-7

As background information, here is the link and below is the copy of the SEC report citing David Marvin currently of Delaware’s Cash Management Board, and fining his firm M & P, $976,000 dollars…

Here is Celia’s account of last years inside dealing, targeting Marvin as the prime whiner in the infamous Cash Management Board pushback… It just dawned on me that Marvin probably handles investments for Markell and Blevins. Which would if true, provide clarity to the mechanizations that took place this past year.

Since the 15 year expiration is about or has already hit, (it was difficult to find), I am posting the entire judgment here, so it will last, if the SEC eliminates it off-line…. Without Further Ado….

=======

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Before the
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

 

INVESTMENT ADVISERS ACT OF 1940
Release No. 1841 / September 30, 1999

 

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING
File No. 3-10072

 

In the Matter of MARVIN & PALMER ASSOCIATES, INC., DAVID F. MARVIN, MACTHOM ASSOCIATES, INC. and THOMAS E. DUBIS

ORDER INSTITUTING PUBLIC PROCEEDDINGS, MAKING FINDINGS, IMPOSING REMEDIAL SANCTIONS, AND ISSUING CEASE-AND-DESIST ORDER

 

I.

 

The Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) deems it appropriate and in the public interest to institute public administrative proceedings pursuant to Sections 203(e), (f) and (k) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (“Advisers Act”), against Marvin & Palmer Associates, Inc. (“M&P”), David F. Marvin (“Marvin”), MacThom Associates, Inc. (“MacThom”) and Thomas E. Dubis (“Dubis”)(collectively “Respondents”).

 

In anticipation of the institution of these proceedings, each of the Respondents has submitted an Offer of Settlement (“Offer”) to the Commission, which the Commission has determined to accept. Solely for the purpose of these proceedings and any other proceedings brought by or on behalf of the Commission or in which the Commission is a party, and without admitting or denying the findings contained herein, except for the jurisdiction of the Commission over them and over the subject matter of this proceeding, which is admitted, Respondents consent to the issuance of this Order Instituting Public Proceedings, Making Findings, Imposing Remedial Sanctions, and Issuing Cease-and-Desist Order (“Order”) and to the entry of the findings, cease-and-desist order, and remedial sanctions set forth below.

 

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that proceedings pursuant to Sections 203(e), (f) and (k) of the Advisers Act be, and hereby are, instituted.

 

II.

 

On the basis of this Order and the Offers submitted by the Respondents, the Commission makes the following findings:

 

RESPONDENTS

 

A.Marvin & Palmer Associates, Inc., incorporated and located in Wilmington, Delaware, has been registered with the Commission as an investment adviser since August 1986. As of March 11, 1999, M&P had approximately 62 clients and $7.6 billion in assets under management. M&P’s clients are primarily large institutional investors.

 

B.David F. Marvin, age 58, resides in Delaware and is Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and 50 percent owner of M&P. Marvin is the largest shareholder of M&P and is responsible for the overall management of the firm.

 

C.MacThom Associates, Inc., located in Kent, Ohio, was formed in 1996 and is wholly owned and operated by Thomas E. Dubis. The firm was ostensibly formed for the purpose of providing research services to M&P. At no time has MacThom been registered with the Commission as a broker-dealer or an investment adviser.

 

D.Thomas E. Dubis, age 58, resides in Kent, Ohio.

 

INTRODUCTION

 

E.This proceeding involves the failure of M&P, a registered investment adviser, to disclose to its clients its use of at least $920,000 in soft dollars derived from a directed brokerage arrangement with a registered broker-dealer (“Broker”) in violation of provisions of the Advisers Act. The term “soft dollars” generally describes an arrangement whereby an investment adviser uses commission credits generated by securities trades executed in advisory client accounts to pay for research, brokerage, or other products, services, or expenses.

 

THE SOFT DOLLAR ARRANGEMENT

 

F.Since 1991, M&P has maintained a soft dollar arrangement with the Broker. Pursuant to the arrangement, M&P receives $.50 in soft dollar credits for each $1.00 in brokerage commissions directed to the Broker.

 

G.In February 1996, at Marvin’s behest, M&P directed the Broker to begin paying invoices submitted by MacThom, ostensibly for research performed by MacThom for M&P. In fact, MacThom conducted only a small amount of research, with a total value of $63,000 during the relevant time period. Most of the soft dollar payments were used by MacThom to compensate Dubis, MacThom’s principal and a close friend of Marvin, as well as the family of a deceased business associate and friend of Marvin, for their efforts in making introductions and referrals to M&P in its early years. From February 1996 through August 1998, the Broker paid $920,000 to MacThom, and MacThom and Dubis paid $635,000 of this amount to this family. With the exception of the research valued at $63,000, the payments to MacThom provided no benefit to the clients of M&P whose commissions generated the soft dollars used to make the payments.

 

M&P’S FAILURE TO DISCLOSE THE SOFT DOLLAR ARRANGEMENT

 

H.Neither the existence nor the terms of the soft dollar arrangement were disclosed to M&P’s clients in their advisory contracts or otherwise. Furthermore, M&P failed to amend its Form ADV after directing the Broker to begin paying invoices from MacThom and the arrangement was never disclosed in M&P’s Form ADV in effect between February 1996 and July 1998, the period during which the arrangement was in effect.

 

I.M&P failed to disclose the types of products and services it received pursuant to its soft dollar arrangement in response to Item 12 of Part II of the Form ADV, which requires registered investment advisers to describe the factors considered in selecting brokers, including the products, research and services obtained, and any procedures used to direct client transactions to a particular broker in return for products or services.

 

J.From February 1996 to July 1998, M&P’s Form ADV reflected a “no” answer in response to Part II Item 13.A., which asked whether the adviser “receives some economic benefit (including commissions, equipment or non-research services) from a non-client in connection with giving advice to clients.” In view of its soft dollar arrangement with the Broker, and the uses to which the payments were put, this response was false.

 

K.During the period in which the arrangement was in effect, M&P amended its Form ADV on at least eight occasions. Marvin reviewed and signed all but one of M&P’s Forms ADV and amendments filed with the Commission.

 

III.

 

LEGAL ANALYSIS

 

A.An investment adviser has a duty to disclose to clients all material information which might incline an investment adviser consciously or unconsciously to render advice which is not disinterested. SEC v. Capital Gains Research Bureau, Inc., 375 U.S. 180, 191-92 (1963). A fact is material if there is a substantial likelihood that a reasonable investor would consider it important. Basic, Inc. v. Levinson, 485 U.S. 224, 231-32 (1988).

 

B.Soft dollar arrangements are material because of the potential conflict of interest arising from an adviser’s receipt of some benefit in exchange for directing brokerage on behalf of client accounts. See Kingsley, Jennison, McNulty & Morse, Inc., 55 SEC Docket 2434, 2441 (Dec. 23, 1993);Interpretive Release Concerning the Scope of Section 28(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Exchange Act Release No. 23170, 35 SEC Docket 905, 909 (Apr. 23, 1986) (“1986 Soft Dollar Release“).

 

C.Moreover, disclosure of soft dollar arrangements is specifically required by Form ADV.¹ See Oakwood Counselors, Inc., Advisers Act Release No. 1614, 63 SEC Docket 2485 (Feb. 10, 1997); S Squared Technology Corp., Advisers Act Release No. 1575, 62 SEC Docket 1560 (August 7, 1996). Form ADV embodies mandatory disclosure requirements to ensure that material information regarding brokerage placement practices and policies are disclosed to investors. See Investment Adviser Requirements Concerning Disclosure, Recordkeeping, Applications for Registration and Annual Filings, Advisers Act Release No. 664 (Jan. 30, 1979); Disclosure of Brokerage Placement Practices By Certain Regulated Investment Companies and Certain Other Issuers, Advisers Act Release No. 665 (Jan. 30, 1979) (“1979 Soft Dollar Release“).

 

D.Items 12 and 13, and Schedule F, of Part II of Form ADV require registrants to disclose soft dollar arrangements with broker-dealers. For investment advisers who have discretionary authority to select the broker-dealers to be used to execute trades in client accounts, Item 12.B. requires a description of the factors considered in selecting brokers and determining the reasonableness of their commissions. Further, Item 12.B. requires advisers to describe the “products, research and services” given to the adviser or related persons, if the value of such “products, research and services” is a factor in selecting broker-dealers.² Item 13 requires an investment adviser to disclose and describe any arrangement whereby it either receives an economic benefit from a non-client in connection with giving advice to clients or directly or indirectly compensates any person for client referrals.³ These disclosure requirements are designed to “assist clients in determining whether to hire an adviser or continue a contract with an adviser, and permit them to evaluate any conflicts of interest inherent in the adviser’s arrangements for allocating brokerage.” Kingsley, 55 SEC Docket at 2441-42; See S Squared, Advisers Act Release No. 1575, 62 SEC Docket 1560.

 

VIOLATIONS OF SECTIONS 206(1) AND 206(2) OF THE ADVISERS ACT

 

E.Sections 206(1) and (2) prohibit an investment adviser from employing any device, scheme, or artifice to defraud clients or from engaging in any transaction, practice or course of business that operates as a fraud on clients. Sections 206(1) and (2) establish a fiduciary duty for investment advisers to act for the benefit of their clients. Transamerica Mortgage Advisers, Inc. v. Lewis, 444 U.S. 11, 17 (1979). An investment adviser’s failure to disclose its soft dollar practices violates Sections 206(1) and 206(2). Renaissance Capital Advisors, Inc., Advisers Act Release No. 1688, 1997 SEC LEXIS 2643 (Dec. 22, 1997) (Sections 206(1) and 206(2));Oakwood, Advisers Act Release No. 1614, 63 SEC Docket 2485 (Sections 206(1) and 206(2)); S Squared, Advisers Act Release No. 1575, 62 SEC Docket 1560 (Section 206(2)). Scienter is an element of a Section 206(1) violation. Steadman v. SEC, 603 F.2d 1126, 1134 (5th Cir. 1979). Proof of scienter is not required to establish a violation of Section 206(2). SEC v. Capital Gains Research Bureau, Inc., 375 U.S. at 195.

 

F.M&P willfully violated Sections 206(1) and (2) by making materially false statements and omissions in M&P’s Form ADV and by failing otherwise to disclose to its clients that M&P was using soft dollar credits to pay non-research expenses.

 

G.Marvin willfully aided and abetted and caused M&P’s violations of Sections 206(1) and (2) by knowingly or recklessly making materially false and omissive statements in M&P’s Form ADV and by failing otherwise to disclose to M&P’s clients that M&P was using soft dollar credits to pay non-research expenses.

 

H.MacThom and Dubis caused M&P’s violations of Sections 206(1) and (2) by knowingly participating in a course of conduct which they knew or should have known was a violation of M&P’s fiduciary duty to its clients.

 

I.As a result of the conduct of M&P, Marvin, MacThom and Dubis, M&P and MacThom were unjustly enriched by $857,000.

 

VIOLATIONS OF SECTION 207 OF THE ADVISERS ACT

 

J.Section 207 of the Advisers Act makes it unlawful for any person willfully to make any untrue statement of material fact in any registration application or report filed with the Commission or willfully to omit to state in any such application or report any material fact required to be stated therein.⁴ A person violates Section 207 by filing false amendments to Form ADV. Stanley Peter Kerry, Advisers Act Release No. 1550, 61 SEC Docket 431 (January 25, 1996).

 

K.M&P’s “no” answer to Item 13.A. in its Form ADV in effect from February 1996 forward was false. M&P was in fact receiving an economic benefit from Broker, a non-client, in the form of soft dollar credits and payments to MacThom for M&P’s benefit. M&P’s response to Item 12.B. in its Form ADV in effect from February 1996 was misleading in that the response failed to disclose that M&P was receiving non-research services from Broker in return for directing client brokerage.

 

L.M&P’s omissions and false and misleading disclosures regarding its soft dollar arrangement were material.

 

M.M&P and Marvin willfully violated Section 207 in that they made untrue statements of material fact in M&P’s Form ADV and failed to disclose in M&P’s Form ADV the existence of the soft dollar arrangement and the non-research services received from the Broker.

 

IV.

 

Based on the foregoing the Commission finds that:

 

A.M&P willfully violated Sections 206(1), 206(2) and 207 of the Advisers Act.

 

B.Marvin willfully violated Section 207 of the Advisers Act and willfully aided and abetted and caused M&P’s violations of Sections 206(1) and 206(2) of the Advisers Act.

 

C.MacThom and Dubis caused M&P’s violations of Sections 206(1) and 206(2) of the Advisers Act.

 

V.

 

In view of the foregoing, the Commission deems it appropriate to accept the Respondents’ Offers of Settlement.

 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

 

A.M&P shall be, and hereby is, censured;

 

B.M&P shall cease and desist from committing or causing any violation and any future violation of Sections 206(1), 206(2) and 207 of the Advisers Act;

 

C.M&P and MacThom shall, jointly and severally, within 30 days of the entry of this Order, pay disgorgement and prejudgment interest in the total amount of $976,980 to the United States Treasury. Such payment shall be: (A) made by United States postal money order, certified check, bank cashier’s check or bank money order; (B) made payable to the Securities and Exchange Commission; (C) hand-delivered or mailed to the Comptroller, Securities and Exchange Commission, Operations Center, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, Stop 0-3, VA 22312; and (D) submitted under cover letter that identifies M&P and MacThom as Respondents in these proceedings, and the file number of these proceedings, a copy of which cover letter and money order or check shall be sent to Ronald C. Long, District Administrator, Philadelphia District Office, Securities and Exchange Commission, 601 Walnut Street, Suite 1120E, Philadelphia, PA 19106;

 

D.M&P shall, within 30 days of the entry of this Order, pay a civil money penalty in the amount of $50,000 to the United States Treasury. Such payment shall be: (A) made by United States postal money order, certified check, bank cashier’s check or bank money order; (B) made payable to the Securities and Exchange Commission; (C) hand-delivered or mailed to the Comptroller, Securities and Exchange Commission, Operations Center, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, Stop 0-3, VA 22312; and (D) submitted under cover letter that identifies M&P as a Respondent in these proceedings, and the file number of these proceedings, a copy of which cover letter and money order or check shall be sent to Ronald C. Long, District Administrator, Philadelphia District Office, Securities and Exchange Commission, 601 Walnut Street, Suite 1120E, Philadelphia, PA 19106;

 

E.M&P shall comply with its undertakings as specified in its Offer of Settlement to perform and implement the following:

 

1.Within 60 days of the entry of this Order, M&P will revise its procedures manual to include a section setting forth policies and procedures regarding soft dollar arrangements with broker-dealers. Included in these procedures will be the requirement that all soft dollar arrangements be approved by in-house counsel employed at M&P. M&P will hold a mandatory meeting with its employees to review policies and procedures including those relating to soft dollar arrangements. Attendance at the meeting will be recorded and a copy maintained in the files of M&P.

 

2.Within 30 days of the entry of this Order, M&P will file with the Commission and provide each of its advisory clients an amended Form ADV disclosing all material terms of any soft dollar arrangement it has with any broker-dealer;

 

3.Within 30 days of the entry of this Order, M&P will provide a copy of this Order to all of its current clients;

 

4.Within 60 days of the entry of this Order, M&P will file an affidavit with the Commission’s staff, addressed to the attention of the District Administrator of the Commission’s Philadelphia District Office, 601 Walnut Street. Suite 1120E, Philadelphia, PA 19106, setting forth the details of its compliance with the undertakings set forth in subparagraphs E.1., 2. and 3. above;

 

5.For a period of one year after the entry of this Order, M&P will provide a copy of this Order to all of its prospective clients;

 

6.One year from the entry of this Order, M&P will file an affidavit with the staff of the Commission certifying its compliance with subparagraph E.5. above.

 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:

 

F. Marvin shall be, and hereby is, censured;

 

G.Marvin shall cease and desist from committing or causing any violation and any future violation of Sections 206(1), 206(2) and 207 of the Advisers Act;

 

H.Marvin shall, within 30 days of the entry of this Order, pay a civil money penalty in the amount of $25,000 to the United States Treasury. Such payment shall be: (A) made by United States postal money order, certified check, bank cashier’s check or bank money order; (B) made payable to the Securities and Exchange Commission; (C) hand-delivered or mailed to the Comptroller, Securities and Exchange Commission, Operations Center, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, Stop 0-3, VA 22312; and (D) submitted under cover letter that identifies Marvin as a Respondent in these proceedings, and the file number of these proceedings, a copy of which cover letter and money order or check shall be sent to Ronald C. Long, District Administrator, Philadelphia District Office, Securities and Exchange Commission, 601 Walnut Street, Suite 1120E, Philadelphia, PA 19106;

 

I.MacThom and Dubis shall cease and desist from causing any violation and any future violation of Sections 206(1) and 206(2) of the Advisers Act.

 

By the Commission.

Jonathan G. Katz
Secretary

 

---

 

FOOTNOTES

 

1	The “safe harbor” provided by Section 28(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) does not excuse an investment adviser from these disclosure obligations. The safe harbor protects an investment adviser only from charges of breach of fiduciary duty for failing to obtain the lowest available commission rate where the amount of commission is reasonable in relation to the value of brokerage and research services provided. 1986 Soft Dollar Release, 35 SEC Docket at 907.
2	See 1986 Soft Dollar Release, 35 SEC Docket at 909. There is a presumption that receipt of non-research and non-brokerage products or services, except where nominally valued, is a factor in the selection of brokers. 1979 Soft Dollar Release at n.6.
3	The 1986 Soft Dollar Release noted the relevance of Form ADV, Part II, Item 13 to soft dollar disclosure. 35 SEC Docket at 909 n.32.
4	Section 204 of the Advisers Act and Rule 204-1 thereunder require periodic filing and amendment of Forms ADV by investment advisers. Pursuant to Rule 204-1(d), a Form ADV or an amendment thereto is a “report” within the meaning of Section 207.

 

http://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/ia-1841.htm

 

---

 

Home | Previous Page

Modified:10/01/1999

 

When Little Children Get Elected Into Office

John Boehner’s Plan To Sue The President

Virginia’s Republican legislators broke into Governor’s office to block ACA coverage for poor

South Carolina Town Reinstates Lesbian Police Chief, Strips Power of Mayor who Fired Her

Nearly 300,000 veterans have lost out on jobless compensation because of the disdainful House GOP

Real Honest-to-God Voter Fraud Comes To Wisconsin

Issa wants ‘DREAMers’ with undocumented parents sent home, no matter how long they’ve been here

ME-Gov LePage: Social Security and Medicare are “welfare, pure and simple”

Americans’ approval of Congress hits a Historic All Time Low of 7% McCarthy points finger at Senate

i was just going over the headlines and noticed how silly Republicans were today after the Mississippi Tea Party got beaten by a normal Republican….

They are nothing short of crazy… Which you know… They shut down the government last October over Obamacare, which is working great, btw…. They got nothing for it. That’s crazy… But their shrill antics today, make it seem as if they know they’ve already lost, and so they, as anyone before the execution squad, says anything they can think of, and much of it, just on the small possibility it might “give them a reprieve”….

The problem is the rest of us have to deal with it…   Do we like it when children scream in a restaurant?  I know no one who does. All say when is the manager going to kick them out?   “Oh,” the manger says, “we can’t upset a customer”….  Ok, so you are upsetting 99 of rest of them then….

A lot of people look at today’s antics and shrug and say, you know it’s just noise, it’s really not hurting anything…. Then they complain about how little they are making, about how much their bills have soared, about how they have no idea right now of how they will retire…..

Duh. That all changes if you get rid of Republicans… You have too little money because Republican legislation set it up that way and those problems won’t go away unless each of you vote them away…..  These  are why you are suffering so…  Why do you not, get it?

Republican Party’s Death Rattle

Remember Super PAC’s?  The fear that Republicans would flood the market with money, so really bad Republican candidates would win over really good Democratic ones?  Well. that hasn’t happened, and the reason why, is rather obvious after 2012.  Why would one throw money away on a candidate who has zero chance of winning?

The key word is “zero”.

The Federal Election Commission has published the top 10 contributors of 2013.  8 lean Democratic, 2 lean Republican and one of those died this past year.

When money does not flow towards ones campaign because of one’s ideology, one’s ideology will remain just that:  ideology.  And that is what is happening.  For those already tied to the losing side, conservatism, being shrill is the only method left in their bag of tricks to shake up campaign donations…  For example if as a candidate I wade into a group of ten people and champion “We really have got to get rid of this president who is black” and one person says “here, here”, I know which of the ten to press for money. Hence we will hear the Tea Party get crazier, and crazier, and crazier, in their attempt to isolate those donars who will only donate if one meets the high bar set by a certain litmus crazy test…

But it will cost in the long run as this chart well shows….  Donors for 2013.

Compiled by Center for Public Integrity from FEC information. (Click image to show party affiliation)

The fears over Citizens United still remain.  Just because no Republicans are on this list today, does not mean they lack the potential to donate next year.  (Adelson and his wife donated $90 million in 2012). but what is telling is that many of the deep-pocketed GOP donors who ranked among the most generous givers during the 2012 election cycle, have yet to open their checkbooks for super PACs during this election cycle. Furthermore, the only 2 Republicans on this list, Bob Perry at number 6  who died, leaving a giant hole in Republican future finances, and the number 10 spot was only to funnel money in to Massachusetts GOP Senatorial candidate Gabriel Gomez,  have since… disbanded….

Republicans are waiting for a more moderate, sensible, and decent human being to step up to the plate before they will think twice of donating any money.  Currently there is only one, Rand Paul, who stands a chance.

What’s The Filibuster Frequency, Kenneth?

A visual reminder for our friends on the other side, exactly why this privilege is being lifted. To the uninitiated, a filibuster is defined as “the stoppage of the accomplishment of something”. If you’ve wondered why Congress is doing nothing, this chart clearly explains why. This afternoon, listen to Rick Jensen cry great big crocodile tears (boo,hoo,hoo) from 1:00 to 3:00 this afternoon (11/21/13) on WDEL. Then if you’re listening Kenneth, stay tune to that frequency of 1150am….. for beer.

The Best President Ever….

I have a running joke with my conservative buddies who bristle every time I bring it up… Most likely because they know it’s true.

They cite small things to try and paint a different picture, but every president has those small things he has to overcome. Washington, Lincoln, there is no exception, except maybe Calvin Coolidge who thought the Chief Executive should do absolutely nothing.  If those little tweaks weren’t there, we probably wouldn’t need an executive branch.   So when Conservatives cite the screw up of the Insurance Sign up computer system as a blemish, I ask them to compare that in scope to see if it is on the same level, as selling weapons to our arch-enemy, and funding an insurgency that Congress forbade giving money too, because the American People didn’t want it.

That of course, is their hero who stooped so low.

If one just takes economics  the greats have to be these… Obama, Clinton, Reagan, Roosevelt….

Roosevelt is sketchy.  His legacy is that he built up legislation protecting the American Middle Class to last for decades, However during his actual term they were either out of work, or fighting a war overseas.

Reagan is best known for reversing his conservative plan and raising lots of taxes along with Tip O’Neil.   That tax raise boosted the economy and got him re-elected with a landslide, so he was able to cut taxes in his latter term, which led to the recession later inherited by the first Bush.

Clinton is best known for his longest running economic expansion in the history of the United States.  He is also best know for creating something no American every thought they would see in their lifetime:  A Federal Surplus.   These two accomplishments put him very near the top.

Finally Obama.  Inherited Roosevelt’s mess, the same one Franklin faced in ’32, and in two years, had most of America back on its feet.  Roosevelt took 9 years.  Of course Roosevelt was acting blind; this president could learn from history and what didn’t work, he could simply not do.  He did this despite a depression similar in scope to the Great Depression, but because quick action was enacted, it was able to be revived soon enough to only be classified as a Recession.  A pretty amazing feat.

Over 5 years, there has been a positive increase in the number of private sector jobs every month… There has never been a month we lost jobs.  No other president, not even Clinton can boast a record like that…  Every month we’ve added private sector jobs.  A fact with which we’ve gotten so comfortable,  the stock market drops if the number of new jobs is not as much as the new jobs created the month before….

Since no other president as ever accomplished this, this would certainly put Obama up for the nomination as the best president ever….

Now consider this….   What other President do we know of … who when he came in …  Had their opponent Senate Minority Leader stand up in front of his caucus, and with a ring of reporters, say…  “We have only one goal, To make this a one term president….. “

And then…..

had that SAME person acquiesce to a deal of un-conditional surrender, that got their party “absolutely nothing“.

From “making this a one time president”   to …  “getting absolutely nothing...”

Surely this is the greatest president in our lifetimes…

Shutdown Statistics

There are 435 votes in the House.  218 is the mark at the number of votes a bill needs to pass.  There are 200 democrats in the House who will pass a budget that funds Obamacare.  There are 25 Republicans who have said out loud, in public, that they will vote for a budget that includes Obamacare…..  200 +25 > (is greater than) 218….

Why has this not been done? Because they know it will pass.  America. Remember in November…..

And while you are at it, make sure Republicans in Delaware feel your wrath for good measure…  Let’s have zero Republicans make it in our state, or if they do, let them pay the triple mortgages on their house that got them there…  🙂