Financial Freedom – Consulting Advice


Check it out! I will guide you towards financial freedom for $5 on

About This Gig

Financial freedom means no debt, maxed retirement, and a saFinancial Freedomfety net large enough to take care of you and the ones you love.

Sometimes, getting started is the hardest part. If you ask yourself, “if only I had someone to help me get started, to help me find out where my money is going and how to best use it”, then this exclusive Fiverr gig is for you.

I have a Masters in Business Administration, an undergrad in Information Technology and I’ve been doing my own personal finances this proven way for over a decade. Getting out of debt for me, meant starting at $115,000 of loans, student, auto, etc and finding a way to manage my finances, figure out what I was worth, how much I owed, and the best way to get towards financial freedom.

I have a lot to offer given my financial experience is home grown. I would love to have the opportunity to share my custom spreadsheets with you, teach you how to reconcile your accounts, find out exactly how much money you are worth today, this very hour, and give you some great advice towards making your tomorrow, richer, healthier, and happier.

Financial freedom can start now. Book this gig and let me help you get where you want to go!

Eric Trump proves the Trump family can't disentangle politics and golf – Washington Post


Eric Trump proves the Trump family can't disentangle politics and golf – Washington Post

Eric Trump, President Trump’s son, opened the new golf course at the Trump Turnberry resort in Scotland on June 28. (The Washington Post)

Eric Trump stood next to a man in medieval costume, flanked by bagpipers, the Scottish breeze sweeping across the finely cut grass. With a clumsy upward swing of his heavy broadsword, the knight — nay, the king, for he was dressed as King Robert the Bruce — officially opened the golf course bearing his name.

Trump proclaimed, “I think today we can finally say, we made Turnberry great again!”

The golf course opening was unremarkable, for the most part; the King Robert the Bruce course is one of many courses the Trump Organization owns around the world — courses that raked in almost $300 million last year alone.

But Trump’s word choice there, saying the Trump organization “made Turnberry great again,” is interesting. It’s directly borrowing his father’s 2016 campaign slogan, “Make America Great Again,” one that, Eric Trump noted in his speech, was printed on countless hats, posters and billboards. It was a political rallying cry, an assertion that now-President Trump, and only Trump, could solve America’s problems.

Using a similar slogan in Scotland is a deliberate allusion to the president. It says to viewers: “Remember, the president of the United States owns this golf course.” It’s a reminder of Trump’s wealth, personal and political success, and it’s a blending of Trump’s political and business ambitions. It implies that the same business and dealmaking acumen that made Trump wealthy, and eventually president, was brought to the rebuilt golf course.

President Trump himself spends a fair amount of time at his golf courses, particularly a few located near Washington and his Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida. The Washington Post’s Philip Bump has tracked dozens of Trump’s visits to his own courses.

President Trump’s courses have been the subject of scrutiny, too. On Tuesday, The Post’s David A. Fahrenthold wrote about a fake TIME magazine cover Trump displays at several of his golf resorts.

So it’s clear the Trump family, and their business, puts a lot of stock in their golf courses and the exclusivity that comes with membership at a Trump property. And it looks like the Trump family is having trouble separating the language they use to talk about politics from the language they use to talk about their businesses.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source link
For additional political articles, view my site: Through The Eyes of Geek

Putting Cadillac's self-driving Super Cruise technology to the test – CNBC


Putting Cadillac's self-driving Super Cruise technology to the test – CNBC

Shortly after we pulled on to Interstate 280, just north of Palo Alto, California, the Cadillac CT6 signaled to me that I was now ready to drive hands free.

Seconds later, I pressed a button. The top of the steering wheel lit up with a green light and the car was now under the control, and vision, of Super Cruise. I took my hands off the wheel and my feet off the pedals and for the next 15 minutes, as we drove through rush hour traffic, I did not touch the steering wheel.

“This takes driving to a whole new level,” said Robb Bolio, one of the lead engineers for autonomous-drive vehicles at General Motors. “Super Cruise lets you do other things, like make phone calls, but it’s not tedious or stressful. And on top of all that, it enhances your safety when you are driving.”

Bolio and other executives at Cadillac expect Super Cruise is a game changer — the type of technology that will prompt luxury car buyers to consider Cadillac instead of passing on the GM brand and opting for Mercedes, BMW or Lexus.

But more than anything, Super Cruise is GM’s answer to Tesla’s Autopilot technology, which made a huge splash when it was introduced two years ago. Autopilot dominates the conversation when car buyers and the general public talk about self-driving cars.

“This is definitely a shot across the bow of Tesla, which already has Autopilot,” said Michelle Krebs, analyst for “Cadillac is really trying to take Tesla on in that category of technology.”

There are some key differences between Cadillac’s Super Cruise and Tesla’s Autopilot.

The Super Cruise system includes a small camera on the steering column that watches the eyes of the driver. If you are not watching the road for more than a few seconds and you are texting, surfing the web on your phone or falling asleep, the camera on the steering wheel will prompt the Super Cruise to alert you to take control.

The first warning is the steering wheel flashing. After that, the CT6 sends an audio warning and the steering wheel starts flashing red, both telling you to take control.

If you continue to ignore the warnings and do not re-engage the car, Super Cruise will turn on the CT6’s hazard lights and slow down the car, eventually bringing it to a stop. At that point, an OnStar operator will reach out to the driver.

“How long it takes before the system notices a driver is not paying attention depends on your speed,” said Bolio. “If you are going 75 miles per hour, it’s three or four seconds, depending on the traffic around you. If you are in bumper-to-bumper traffic going 10 miles per hour, it’s a little longer.”

That’s the other major difference between Cadillac’s Super Cruise and Tesla’s Autopilot. Super Cruise can only be engaged on the highway and does not automatically do lane changes. Tesla’s Autopilot allows drivers to signal a lane change and if the sensors on the car show the lane is free, it automatically moves the car over with the driver not having to touch the steering wheel.

In addition, Autopilot can be engaged in city driving, not just on the highway.

So after testing out Super Cruise, the question is whether I felt it changed my driving experience? I admit having the car watch me added a level security and reassurance. In addition, the system was intuitive and easy to use.

That said, I would love to see it expand beyond highway driving. There are plenty of major roads I use on the way to work where Super Cruise would make the drive far less frustrating as I constantly ride the brake in rush hour traffic.

Super Cruise will be offered on Cadillac CT6 models starting this fall.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source link
For additional technology articles, visit my site: Through The Eyes of Geek

Senate Health Bill in Peril as CBO Predicts 22 Million More Uninsured – New York Times


Senate Health Bill in Peril as CBO Predicts 22 Million More Uninsured – New York Times

WASHINGTON — The Senate bill to repeal the Affordable Care Act was edging toward collapse on Monday after the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said it would increase the number of people without health insurance by 22 million by 2026.

Two Republicans, Senators Susan Collins of Maine and Rand Paul of Kentucky, said Monday that they would vote against even debating the health care bill, joining Senator Dean Heller of Nevada, who made the same pledge on Friday. Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin hinted that he, too, would probably oppose taking up the bill on a procedural vote expected as early as Tuesday, meaning a collapse could be imminent.

“It’s worse to pass a bad bill than pass no bill,” Mr. Paul told reporters.

The Run-Up

The podcast that makes sense of the most delirious stretch of the 2016 campaign.

Ms. Collins wrote on Twitter on Monday evening that she wanted to work with her colleagues from both parties to fix flaws in the Affordable Care Act, but that the budget office’s report showed that the “Senate bill won’t do it.”

The report left Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the majority leader, with the unenviable choices of changing senators’ stated positions, withdrawing the bill from consideration while he renegotiates, or letting it go down to defeat — a remarkable conclusion to the Republicans’ seven-year push to repeal President Barack Obama’s signature domestic achievement.

But the budget office put Republicans in an untenable position. It found that next year, 15 million more people would be uninsured compared with current law. Premiums and out-of-pocket expenses could shoot skyward for some low-income people and for people nearing retirement, it said.

The legislation would decrease federal deficits by a total of $321 billion over a decade, the budget office said.

Mr. McConnell, the chief author of the bill, wanted the Senate to approve it before a planned recess for the Fourth of July, but that looks increasingly doubtful. Misgivings in the Republican conference extend beyond just a few of the most moderate and conservative members, and Mr. McConnell can lose only two Republicans.

At least some of Ms. Collins’s concerns could be shared by Senators Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia, whose rural states would face effects similar to those in Maine.

“If you were on the fence, you were looking at this as a political vote, this C.B.O. score didn’t help you,” said Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina. “So I think it’s going to be harder to get to 50, not easier.”

He added, “I don’t know, if you delayed it for six weeks, if anything changes.”

Under the bill, the budget office said, subsidies to help people buy health insurance would be “substantially smaller than under current law.” And deductibles would, in many cases, be higher. Starting in 2020, the budget office said, premiums and deductibles would be so onerous that “few low-income people would purchase any plan.”

Moreover, the report said, premiums for older people would be much higher under the Senate bill than under current law. As an example, it said, for a typical 64-year-old with an annual income of $26,500, the net premium in 2026 for a midlevel silver plan, after subsidies, would average $6,500, compared with $1,700 under the Affordable Care Act. And the insurance would cover less of the consumer’s medical costs.

Likewise, the report said, for a 64-year-old with an annual income of $56,800, the premium in 2026 would average $20,500 a year, or three times the amount expected under the Affordable Care Act.

The budget office report was a major setback to Senate Republican leaders, but it was too early to declare the legislation dead, and turmoil in health insurance markets could still induce Congress to take action this year. Many people thought the House repeal bill was dead after Speaker Paul D. Ryan pulled it from the floor on March 24, but a slightly revised version was narrowly approved by the House six weeks later.

Senator John Thune of South Dakota, a member of the Republican leadership, suggested that leaders would press forward with the Senate bill. He said that an argument could be made for delaying it “if you thought you were going to get a better policy,” but that that was not the case.

“This is the best we can do to try and satisfy all the different perspectives in our conference,” Mr. Thune said, adding that he did not think the politics would improve by waiting. “It’s time to fish or cut bait.”

The White House discounted the report, saying the budget office had “consistently proven it cannot accurately predict how health care legislation will impact insurance coverage.”

The Trump administration says the Senate Republican bill would not cut Medicaid because spending would still grow from year to year. But the Congressional Budget Office said that the bill would reduce projected Medicaid spending by a total of $772 billion in the coming decade, and that the number of people covered by Medicaid in 2026 would be 15 million lower than under current law.

In 2026, it said, Medicaid spending would be 26 percent lower than under current law, and enrollment of people under 65 would be 16 percent lower. Beyond 2026, Medicaid enrollment would keep declining compared with what would happen under current law.

The Senate bill would make it much easier for states to obtain waivers exempting them from certain federal insurance standards, like those that require insurers to provide a minimum set of health benefits. The budget office said that nearly half of all Americans could be affected by these cutbacks in “essential benefits,” and that as a result, coverage for maternity care, mental health care, rehabilitation services and certain very expensive drugs “could be at risk.”

Before the budget office released its report, the American Medical Association had announced its opposition to the bill, and the National Governors Association had cautioned the Senate against moving too quickly.

The budget office’s findings immediately gave fodder to Democrats, who were already assailing the bill as cruel. Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the Democratic leader, said Senate Republicans had been saying for weeks that their bill would be an improvement over the House bill, which President Trump had described as “mean.”

The budget office had found that under the House bill, the number of people without health insurance would increase by 23 million by 2026 — only slightly more than the 22 million projected for the Senate bill.

“C.B.O.’s report today makes clear that this bill is every bit as mean as the House bill,” Mr. Schumer said. “This C.B.O. report should be the end of the road for Trumpcare. Republicans would be wise to read it like a giant stop sign, urging them to turn back from this path that would be disastrous for the country, for middle-class Americans and for their party.”

The criticism was not confined to the Democratic caucus. Mr. Johnson, one of five Senate Republicans who said last week that they could not support the bill as drafted, told a radio host that Senate leaders were “trying to jam this thing through.” He, too, suggested he would not vote even to begin debating the bill.

“I have a hard time believing I’ll have enough information for me to support a motion to proceed this week,” Mr. Johnson said later on Monday.

Beyond the number of Americans without insurance, the Senate bill’s $321 billion in deficit reduction is larger than the $119 billion that the budget office found for the bill that passed the House.

Earlier Monday afternoon, Senate Republican leaders altered their bill to penalize people who go without health insurance by requiring them to wait six months before their coverage would begin. Insurers would generally be required to impose the waiting period on people who lacked coverage for more than about two months in the previous year.

The waiting period was meant to address a notable omission in the Senate’s bill: The measure would end the Affordable Care Act’s mandate that most Americans have health insurance, but also require insurers to accept anyone who applied. The proposal is supposed to prevent people from waiting until they get sick to buy a health plan. Insurers need large numbers of healthy people, whose premiums help defray the cost of care for those who are sick.

Under one of the most unpopular provisions of the Affordable Care Act, the government can impose tax penalties on people who go without health coverage. Republicans have denounced this as government coercion.

The repeal bill passed by the House last month has a different kind of incentive. It would impose a 30 percent surcharge on premiums for people who have gone without insurance.

Mr. Trump wrote on Twitter on Monday that Republican senators were “working very hard to get there” but were not getting any help from Democrats.

“Not easy! Perhaps just let OCare crash & burn!” Mr. Trump wrote, reiterating his assertion that the Affordable Care Act would be doomed if Congress did not come to its rescue.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source link
For additional political articles, view my site: Through The Eyes of Geek

How Governors From Both Parties Plotted to Derail the Senate Health Bill – New York Times


How Governors From Both Parties Plotted to Derail the Senate Health Bill – New York Times

WASHINGTON — A once-quiet effort by governors to block the full repeal of the Affordable Care Act reached its climax in Washington on Tuesday, as state executives from both parties — who have conspired privately for months — mounted an all-out attack on the Senate’s embattled health care legislation hours before Republicans postponed a vote.

At the center of the effort has been a pair of low-key moderates: Gov. John R. Kasich, Republican of Ohio, and Gov. John W. Hickenlooper, Democrat of Colorado, who on Tuesday morning called on the Senate to reject the Republican bill and to negotiate a bipartisan alternative.

Just before Senate Republicans delayed a vote on the bill, Mr. Kasich denounced his own party’s legislation in biting terms, saying it would victimize the poor and mentally ill, and redirect tax money “to people who are already very wealthy.”

The Run-Up

The podcast that makes sense of the most delirious stretch of the 2016 campaign.

“This bill,” Mr. Kasich said, “is unacceptable.”

The mounting criticism from governors, including sharp denunciations from within President Trump’s party, helped stymie Republican efforts to marshal support in the Senate, and may have led, in a roundabout way, to the stalling of the measure this week.

More than half a dozen Republican governors, including several from states with Republican senators, expressed either grave reservations or outright opposition to the bill, while Democrats have been unanimous in their disapproval. Though their preferences on health policy diverge in many ways, state leaders from both parties were alarmed at the potential for harm to their constituents, state budgets and insurance markets.

Gov. Brian Sandoval, Republican of Nevada, rejected the Senate proposal so forcefully that he helped sway his state’s Republican senator, Dean Heller, to oppose the measure. Mr. Heller’s unrestrained attack on the bill on Friday helped set off a chain of events that forced Senate Republicans to delay the vote.

On Monday, a second bipartisan pair of governors, Terry McAuliffe of Virginia, a Democrat, and Charlie Baker of Massachusetts, a Republican, issued a joint letter asking the Senate to halt its dash toward a vote.

In an indication of the stakes involved for the states, Mr. McAuliffe and Mr. Baker wrote explicitly in their capacity as chairman of the National Governors Association and vice chairman of its health and human services committee — a striking gesture given the nonpartisan organization’s reputation for caution in politically sensitive matters.

The doggedness of the governor-led efforts reflects the expansive implications of a federal health care overhaul for state governments. In states that accepted expanded Medicaid funding under the Affordable Care Act, including Ohio and Nevada, the sharp restrictions on the program imposed under the Senate bill would batter state budgets and threaten the health coverage of millions of people.

The current Senate bill, which could be revised extensively, would wind down support for expanded Medicaid coverage and recalculate federal funding for longstanding Medicaid programs on a more restrictive basis. The Congressional Budget Office projected on Monday that the Senate’s plan would lead to 15 million fewer people receiving Medicaid coverage by 2026.

There has been no visible effort among governors to lobby in support of the legislation, and most Republican governors have either remained silent or given equivocal statements on the bill.

But if the legislation does unravel further, governors will have played a hand: Mr. Hickenlooper said in an interview that he and Mr. Kasich had agreed to team up after a February meeting of the governors’ association in Washington, where state leaders heard an alarming presentation about the potential consequences of a federal pullback in health care.

Within weeks, Mr. Hickenlooper said, both Mr. Kasich and Mr. Sandoval had sought his help in taking on their own party. Mr. Kasich, the Colorado governor recalled, expressed confidence that he could find other Republicans who would “take a pretty strong stand that coverage shouldn’t be rolled back.”

A tentative game plan emerged: They would assemble a nimble, informal group of governors, from the right and left of center, who would publicly express concern about health care legislation drafted in the House and Senate. The governors would press for a slower, less disruptive and more public legislative process, and insist on protections for states that had greatly expanded their Medicaid rolls.

Joining Mr. Kasich and Mr. Sandoval on the Republican side was Mr. Baker. On the Democratic side, Mr. Hickenlooper recruited Steve Bullock of Montana, John Bel Edwards of Louisiana and Tom Wolf of Pennsylvania.

The core group of seven has spoken out against a precipitous repeal of the Affordable Care Act — publicly urging caution, lobbying members of Congress and issuing dire assessments of how their states could suffer. They have also gently reached out to colleagues who might be wary of signing a joint letter criticizing Republican legislation, but would be willing separately to express their own reservations about a rollback of existing health care law.

Other governors on the Republican side have drifted in and out of the conversations, including Rick Snyder of Michigan and Asa Hutchinson of Arkansas. After Senate Republicans hit pause on their bill, Gov. Chris Sununu, Republican of New Hampshire, made public a letter he sent to Senate leaders warning that the proposal would “lead to cuts in eligibility, loss of coverage or significant increases in state taxes.”

John Weaver, Mr. Kasich’s chief political adviser, said Mr. Kasich had spoken recently with other Republican governors, including Mr. Snyder, Doug Ducey of Arizona and Larry Hogan of Maryland, who have publicly criticized the Senate proposal. “He has worked it on the phone,” Mr. Weaver said of Mr. Kasich. “There are a number of Republican governors who he spoke to and didn’t want to sign the letter, but came out on our position.”

Mr. Weaver said the group hoped its appeals would put political pressure on the Senate and serve as a model of bipartisan action that Congress could copy in a more protracted negotiation.

Now that Senate Republicans have balked, aides to several of the governors said they hoped lawmakers in both parties would craft a different measure focused principally on stabilizing insurance markets. It is unclear whether the Senate might consider that approach.

“There’s all this talk in Washington that neither side can work with the other,” Mr. Weaver said. “That doesn’t need to be the case.”

In addition to the disruptive impact the health bill would have on states, there are clear political implications for governors if the legislation passes, an increasingly tenuous possibility.

On Wednesday, the Democratic Governors Association is to begin a campaign of digital advertising and automated phone calls in several states, attacking Republican state leaders on the issue of health care, said a spokesman for the group, Jared Leopold.

To the extent that governors openly opposed the bill, it helped create an untenable situation for undecided senators, and critics of the legislation embraced Mr. Sandoval’s role in wooing Mr. Heller as a template to follow. Mr. Heller offered his denunciation of the Republican plan at a news conference with Mr. Sandoval on Friday.

Mr. Sandoval told other governors, at a conference in Montana last weekend, that he had urged Mr. Heller to ignore potential backlash from the right and come out against the bill because “the people of Nevada will respect you and you will rise above that commotion,” according to Mr. Hickenlooper, who said he met with Mr. Sandoval on Sunday night.

Mr. Kasich and Mr. Hickenlooper indicated Tuesday that they were hopeful, but far from certain, that Republican senators from their states would help defeat the legislation. After Tuesday’s decision, it is unclear when a vote will ultimately take place.

Besides Mr. Heller, there are a number of Republican senators from states whose governors have been critical of the legislation, including Senator Rob Portman of Ohio and Senators John McCain and Jeff Flake of Arizona.

Mr. Kasich, who said he had spoken with Mr. Portman, said that Democratic senators should volunteer to cooperate on a negotiated solution, and that Republicans who campaigned on a root-and-branch repeal of the Affordable Care Act should be “big enough” to say they changed their minds.

Mr. Hickenlooper said he was seeking a meeting with Senator Cory Gardner of Colorado, a first-term Republican. “I will go camp out on his doorstep if I have to,” Mr. Hickenlooper announced, alongside Mr. Kasich.

No such theatrics were necessary: In a second interview on Tuesday evening, Mr. Hickenlooper said Mr. Gardner had called his cellphone “literally 30 seconds after I walked out of the press conference.”

Mr. Hickenlooper said he made his case to Mr. Gardner for preserving Colorado’s coverage level, adding somewhat sheepishly that he had not meant to imply Mr. Gardner was evading him. “He clearly responded the moment he heard such a comment,” the governor said.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source link
For additional political articles, view my site: Through The Eyes of Geek

Technology stocks fall sharply, leading US indexes down – Los Angeles Times


Technology stocks fall sharply, leading US indexes down – Los Angeles Times

Technology stocks led a broad slide in U.S. stocks Tuesday after a day of mostly choppy trading.

Phone and utilities companies were among the big decliners after a sell-off in bonds sent yields sharply higher. Banks bucked the broader market decline amid heightened expectations of rising interest rates. Oil prices rose for the fourth straight day.

Developments in Washington helped put investors in a selling mood. Republican leaders in the Senate decided to delay a vote on a healthcare overhaul bill until after the Fourth of July recess.

“The delay of the healthcare vote added to a little bit of the uneasiness going into the quarter end here,” said Sean Lynch, co-head of global equity strategy at the Wells Fargo Investment Institute. “It’s just worries that some of this political noise can complicate the chance of possible tax reform, healthcare reform and other policy measures that could boost the economy.”

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source link
For additional technology articles, visit my site: Through The Eyes of Geek

The Vexing Racial Politics of This Season's “Bachelorette” – The New Yorker


The Vexing Racial Politics of This Season's “Bachelorette” – The New Yorker

The charm of ABC’s “Bachelor” franchise lies in its wholehearted embrace
of dying social convention. The institution of marriage is on a steep
decline, yet, on “The Bachelor” and its spinoff, “The Bachelorette,”
contestants consider it their raison d’être. Heterosexuality stubbornly
governs the “Bachelor” universe, while sex is mostly talked about, not had
(or at least not shown). It all feels like a pleasantly arcane
sociological fantasy—a libidinous, wine-drunk love Olympics that is
perpetually twenty-five years too late.

Social segregation, however, is a convention that remains alive and
well, both in the country at large and in the world of staged reality.
Each of the past thirty-three Bachelors and Bachelorettes has been
white, and each has dismissed the few contestants of color to choose a
white partner in the end. So the announcement, in February, that Rachel
Lindsay, a black woman, had been chosen as the newest Bachelorette
marked a grossly belated kind of progress. Lindsay, the fan favorite
from last season’s “The Bachelor,” is a plucky and practical attorney
from Dallas with an irresistible gap-toothed smile. Earlier this year,
she was tactful when asked about the politics of her new post, telling
“My journey of love isn’t any different just because my skin color is.”
But “The Bachelor” has always, in its way, provided a referendum on
racial desirability; the first black Bachelorette is just the first
participant expected to acknowledge it.

So far, her cautious diplomacy hasn’t succeeded in preventing
troublesome reality from intruding. She has been on the receiving end of
a few gauche remarks, and has taken them in stride, as when Dean
Unglert, a giddy twenty-five-year-old contestant, greeted her by
announcing, “I’m ready to go black and I’m never going to go back.” In
last week’s episode, during a mercifully brief rap freestyle, Peter, the
well-coiffed front-runner, called her “a girl from the hood.” But an
uglier kind of ignorance has been on display mostly behind Lindsay’s
back, in the form of Lee Garrett, a white contestant from Nashville,
Tennessee, who has emerged as the show’s primary provocateur.

It’s been clear that Lee means trouble since shortly after the season’s
première, when some of his old tweets surfaced online, revealing that he
had, among other things, referred to Black Lives Matter as a terrorist
group. On the show, he is unnervingly smug and a self-proclaimed
troublemaker. He displays no convincing interest in Lindsay but a
remarkable passion for blocking the wooing attempts of his black
competitors. In Episode 3, he takes it upon himself to tell Lindsay that
a black contestant, Eric Bigger, is “aggressive” and uninterested in
her. The following week, he shifts his focus to Kenny King, an earnest
wrestler and father from Las Vegas. Garrett interrupts King’s alone time
with Lindsay, and appears pleased when King becomes visibly irritated.
After the two men have it out, Garrett reports the confrontation to
Lindsay, framing himself as innocent and Kenny as a threat. In
confessionals, Garrett says that he enjoys poking King, that he’ll just
“wink and smile” when King becomes “aggressive.” He repeats the word
“aggressive” as if it were a charm. King tries to defend himself, but he
avoids making pronouncements about race; he is aware, presumably, of how
his defensiveness could be flipped to bolster Garrett’s accusations.
Lindsay, though, after learning of the pair’s spats, breaks
down in tears, finally feeling, she says, the “pressures of being a
black woman.”

What is most frustrating about this saga is the show’s editing, which
presents Garrett’s racist antagonizing and King’s angry responses as
morally equivalent. King calls Garrett a “snake,” a “Lee-zard,” and “a
bitch,” but that is in response to Garrett constantly
commenting that King is “big,” “angry,” and “violent.” When another black
contestant tries to explain to Garrett that “there is a long history of
people calling black men ‘aggressive,’ ” Garrett replies that it is King
who is “playing the race card.” It is cheap, even for “The
Bachelorette,” to equate nasty gaslighting with garden-variety
television villainy. One can only speculate about how much the producers
knew about Garrett’s views before they decided to cast him. Regardless,
as Ira Madison III has pointed
at The Daily Beast, the show seems intent on “using the black male
contestants as fodder for their race experiment.” On Monday night’s
episode, after Lindsay brings Garrett and King to a wilderness clearing
for a “clarifying” date, the episode ends on yet another cliffhanger,
prolonging the drama for a special Part Two, which airs tonight. But it
seems clear that the conflict with Garrett has already spoiled any
chances King might have had with Lindsay. The teaser for tonight’s
episode shows him with a swollen, bloodied eye.

Meanwhile, “The Bachelorette” carries on with parallel storylines of
uncomplicated interracial dating. At one point in Monday’s episode, King
brings Garrett out to a balcony to question him about the negative
things he’s told Lindsay. Their argument is intercut with scenes of a
windswept Lindsay on a sailboat with Bryan Abasolo, a smooth-talking
chiropractor. The contrast suggests that both Garrett and King
have lost their romantic way by shifting the focus from Lindsay onto one
another, a classic “Bachelor” death knell. “I don’t think about all this
other drama,” Abasolo says, drawing Lindsay’s face close to his. “All I
think about is you.” How nice to have that luxury.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source link
For additional political articles, view my site: Through The Eyes of Geek

Senate GOP delays vote on healthcare bill until after July 4 recess – Los Angeles Times


Senate GOP delays vote on healthcare bill until after July 4 recess – Los Angeles Times

Here’s our look at the Trump administration and the rest of Washington

June 27, 2017, 10:53 a.m.

Senate GOP leaders abruptly delay vote on healthcare bill until after July 4th recess

Facing resistance from their own party, Senate Republican leaders said Tuesday they would postpone a vote on their healthcare bill until after the July 4th recess.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell wants to provide more time to make changes to the bill to try to convince reluctant GOP senators to vote for the measure.

“We’re going to press on,” McConnell said, adding he remains optimistic. “We’re continuing to talk.”

Since the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said the bill would leave 22 million more Americans without insurance after 10 years, several Republicans senators had said they would not even support allowing the bill to be brought to the Senate floor for a vote.

Meanwhile, President Trump invited all GOP senators to the White House for a meeting Tuesday afternoon.

But Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), a moderate who has expressed serious doubts about the bill, questioned whether revisions would make a difference.

“I have so many fundamental problems with the bill, that have been confirmed by the CBO report, that it’s difficult to see how any tinkering is going to satisfy my fundamental and deep concerns about the bill,” Collins said on CNN.

McConnell is struggling to appease two factions in his party. Centrists like Collins want to lessen the impact of proposed cuts to Medicaid, while conservatives want to go further in repealing benefits provided under Obamacare.

Senate leaders hope to continue talks this week, with an eye toward moving quickly when Congress returns after the holiday. McConnell plans to wait for the CBO to review any changes and reissue a score.

He can only afford to lose two Republicans given the party’s 52-seat majority in the Senate.

“There’s more work that needs to be done, it’s pretty obvious,” said Republican Sen. Jim Risch of Idaho as he was leaving a Senate lunch with Vice President Mike Pence. Pence ignored reporters questions about the decision. “If more work needs to be done, you shouldn’t try to light the fire.”

But the delay in a vote will give Democrats and other opponents of the repeal bill more time to mobilize, particularly as Republicans return to their home districts during the holiday.

“We know the fight is not over,” said Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer of New York.

Copyright © 2017, Los Angeles Times

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source link
For additional political articles, view my site: Through The Eyes of Geek

How Focus On Technology Can Drive Sales For McDonald's – Forbes


How Focus On Technology Can Drive Sales For McDonald's – Forbes

GOP Infighting Stalls Budget Plan – U.S. News & World Report


GOP Infighting Stalls Budget Plan – U.S. News & World Report

[unable to retrieve full-text content]

GOP Infighting Stalls Budget Plan
U.S. News & World Report
Trump Wins at Politics, Falters on Policy · David Catanese | June 23, 2017. The president continues to prove himself politically adept even as Democrats hold the upper hand in Washington's policy debate.

and more »

Source link
For additional political articles, view my site: Through The Eyes of Geek

2 GOP lawmakers take seats after special election wins – The Bozeman Daily Chronicle


2 GOP lawmakers take seats after special election wins – The Bozeman Daily Chronicle

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Republican winner of the most expensive House race ever took her seat representing Atlanta’s outskirts Monday evening, along with a South Carolina Republican who claimed a narrower-than-expected victory to retain a strongly Republican seat.

The dual swearing-in ceremony returned Republicans to full strength in the chamber at 241 seats after the party won four special elections to replace GOP lawmakers who left the House to join President Donald Trump’s Cabinet.

Karen Handel won the closely watched Georgia election by a 52-48 margin last week after a hard-fought, saturation-level campaign. Handel’s opponent, first-time candidate Jon Ossoff, raised $23 million for the race and narrowly led in most polls.


“This is an extraordinary honor and the greatest privilege that I think I have ever had,” Handel said in brief remarks after receiving the oath of office from Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis. She vowed to be “a good co-worker and friend to each of you.”

Republican Ralph Norman, a staunch conservative, had a 3 percentage point victory last week in a far quieter South Carolina race in a district that went for President Donald Trump last year by 18 percentage points. Norman said he was joining the House “at a special time in history.”

Norman told his colleagues that “we’ve got such an opportunity and I look forward to playing a part in working with you to move this country forward.”

Republicans retained all four House seats vacated by lawmakers this year to join the Trump administration, but in every case Democrats outperformed the recent trends in the districts, which were all solidly Republican. The Georgia seat went only narrowly for Trump last year, even though it strongly backed Tom Price, who resigned to become secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services.

Money poured into the Georgia race, which Republicans won after running ads linking Ossoff to Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. After Handel’s victory, some Democrats called for the party to drop Pelosi as its leader.

Handel had narrowly lost a 2010 race for the GOP gubernatorial nomination.

Norman, a former state lawmaker, ran a campaign aligning himself with Trump and is expected to join the House Freedom Caucus, a group of hard-right lawmakers who are sometimes a thorn in the side of GOP leaders. His predecessor, White House budget director Mick Mulvaney helped found the group.

The only remaining House vacancy is a Los Angeles seat formerly held by Democrat Xavier Becerra, who resigned in January to become California’s attorney general. Democratic state Assemblyman Jimmy Gomez easily retained the seat for the party in an election earlier this month, and will assume his seat after completing some remaining state business.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Source link
For additional political articles, view my site: Through The Eyes of Geek





June 2017
« May    

Follow me on Twitter