"Fly the Friendly Skies"
|
Posted:Apr 10, 2017 9:47 pm
Last Updated:Apr 16, 2017 11:46 pm
8802 Views
|
So have you heard about the incident on a United Airlines plane in Chicago today? The flight was from Chicago to Louisville, Ky.
How the airline over booked then did the usual routine of asking for volunteers to leave the plane. They needed four people to give up their seats. People had already boarded at this point and were in their assigned seats. Three people took the offered compensation at some point during the process but they needed one more person to give up a seat. However it was that they chose the four people to be removed the last one that was chosen was an individual who said “I’m not getting off the plane. I’m a doctor; I have to see patients in the morning.”
The United employee told the man that if he didn't get off the plane she would call security. The passenger shouted out to her as she turned away to leave that he was being singled out because he was Chinese.
A plain clothes security officer came in with some associates in uniform. This security officer then reached over to the Doctor and grabs him and pulls him with the help of his associate out of the seat over the armrest busting the guys lip in the process then proceeds to drag him down the isle on his back. The other passengers were complaining about the abusive process as it happened.
Now if this was a passenger that didn't already have a valid ticket and wasn't already seated it would be one thing. If this was a passenger who was doing something to cause problems it would be acceptable. But this was done to allow the company to seat four of their employees in these seats which they had oversold. That's pretty damn shameful in my opinion.
Now I know that the airline always has the right to bump a passenger when they overbook or for whatever reason but don't you think it might have been a better choice given that this was for their own employees to try and get someone else to accept an offer before trying to physically remove a passenger?
I just heard on the news that the employees were not even on the scheduled list of passengers but had just showed up and said they needed to get to Louisville for work... I don't know if that is true but if so it makes it even worse.
I hope he sues the hell out of them and whens a huge settlement.
|
|
|
14
Comments
|
|
What Justice...
|
Posted:Apr 10, 2017 9:56 am
Last Updated:May 12, 2017 9:01 pm
9877 Views
|
So today Neil Gorsuch is getting sworn in.
I can't help but think how I would feel if I was in his position and being sworn in only because the senate had changed the rules in order to lower the standards.
To know that instead of the usual super majority of 60 votes the senate republicans had used and abused their power to changed the rules to allow a simple majority vote of 51 votes to confirm an appointment to a position as important as a supreme court justice. A position that is a lifetime appointment and certainly should be a bipartisan appointment.
Yes the Democrats did the same thing back in 2013 after years of obstructionism by the Republicans for most of the presidential appointment positions such as the federal judicial nominees and the executive-office appointments. I bet they have been kicking themselves in the ass since Trump started filling his cabinet and look at the people who have been confirmed by the Republicans. 
In 2013 Mitch McConnell (R-Ky) led the fight opposing the move by the Democrats.
“It’s a sad day in the history of the Senate,” McConnell said, calling the move a Democratic “power grab.”
Harry Reid (D-Nev) said “The American people believe the Senate is broken, and I believe the American people are right,” he said, adding: “It’s time to get the Senate working again.”
Sounds familiar doesn't it only from different sides this time round.
Of course this brings back the issue of Judge Merrick Garland who was totally ignored by many of the Republican Senators when he was selected by Obama way back on the 16th of March 2016. I don't think that was at all the right thing to do.
From wikipedia....
After the death of Scalia, Republican Senate leaders announced that they planned to hold no vote on any potential nomination during the president's last year in office. Senate Democrats responded that there was sufficient time to vote on a nominee before the election. Garland's nomination expired on January 3, 2017, with the end of the 114th Congress. The nomination remained before the Senate for 293 days, the longest nomination process in the history of Supreme Court nomination. President Donald Trump, a Republican, instead nominated Neil Gorsuch on January 31, 2017.
End quote.
Now I will say that certainly both sides have opposed the other often at times throughout the history of this country and sometimes virulently so but it seems to me the Republicans have become entrenched in the last twenty years or so and that they are causing most of the problems and creating the idea that the government doesn't work. That's not to say by any means that the Democrats aren't equally at fault for this situation as they certainly have a history of pursuing their ideology when they are in power with little care for the Republicans concerns.
Certainly the Republicans know that when the Democrats get back the Senate and the presidency they are not likely to change the rules back. So this all means that the supreme court will end up becoming more partisan and less justice oriented. Kind of similar to the Senate.
I can understand the reason the Democrats chose to do what they did back in 2013 as I saw the obstructionism the Republicans were engaging in just to be difficult when they could. Opposing Obama at every step just as the bigoted McConnell said they would. But they went ahead and did it anyway even when the Republicans were saying how bad it would be for the government and yet the Republicans now turn around and do exactly what they were so against back then. Well the Republicans said they would reciprocate when they reclaimed the majority and I guess they kept their word on that. It seems it is a payback form of government rather than a cooperative form doesn't it. So we the people end up getting slapped back and forth between the Democrats who want to over protect and the Republicans who want turn everything loose.
Myself I think I would have appeared before the Senate and told them not to change the rules to get myself appointed as it isn't the way this country is supposed to work. I'm sure I would have been less kind in the speech I would have made though.
I'm an Independent and don't care a whole lot for either sides extremism, I care about what is right for We the People.
|
|
|
6
Comments
|
|
|
|
The Factor may become history...
|
Posted:Apr 5, 2017 9:18 pm
Last Updated:Apr 22, 2017 11:12 pm
10780 Views
|
Hmmm, do you believe O'Reilly is innocent or guilty of inappropriate behavior? It seems to me I've heard him saying things about people that were accused and had paid settlements looking guilty.
It seems there have been quite a few accusations against the top people at fox from Ailes and Abernathy to O'Reilly over the years. Maybe there was an old boys situation going on there where it was seen as acceptable because the boss was doing it.
Do think Trump the pussy grabber chiming in was helpful?
|
|
|
9
Comments
|
|
Trump's cheap shot...
|
Posted:Apr 5, 2017 10:32 am
Last Updated:Apr 7, 2017 8:23 pm
11187 Views
|
U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, United Nations Ambassador Nikki Haley and the always entertaining White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer have made interesting statements recently on the Assad/Syria situation.
In Ankara Turkey on March 30, Tillerson said the "longer-term status of president Assad" “will be decided by the Syrian people.” On the same day, in New York, Haley stated “our priority is no longer to sit there and focus on getting Assad out.”
The next day Sean Spicer said, “Well, I think with respect to Assad, there is a political reality that we have to accept in terms of where we are right now.”
What more encouraging words does Assad need to feel he can get back to doing what he wants, the full scale destruction of all those in country, who oppose him and his family, as the rulers of Syria.
Trump's recent statement...
“Today’s chemical attack in Syria against innocent people, including women and , is reprehensible and cannot be ignored by the civilized world,” Mr. Trump said in the statement released by the White House. “These heinous actions by the Bashar al-Assad regime are a consequence of the past administration’s weakness and irresolution.”
“President Obama said in 2012 that he would establish a ‘red line’ against the use of chemical weapons and then did nothing,” Mr. Trump continued, referring to Mr. Obama’s first direct threat of force. “The United States stands with our allies across the globe to condemn this intolerable attack.”
But if that wasn't enough there is also the following tweets from before Trump won the electoral college....
June 15, 2013: We should stay the hell out of Syria, the "rebels" are just as bad as the current regime. WHAT WILL WE GET FOR OUR LIVES AND $ BILLIONS?ZERO
August 29, 2013: @walaa_3ssaf No, dopey, I would not go into Syria, but if I did it would be by surprise and not blurted all over the media like fools.
August 29, 2013: What will we get for bombing Syria besides more debt and a possible long term conflict? Obama needs Congressional approval.
September 1, 2013: President Obama's weakness and indecision may have saved us from doing a horrible and very costly (in more ways than money) attack on Syria!
September 2, 2013: If the U.S. attacks Syria and hits the wrong targets, killing civilians, there will be worldwide hell to pay. Stay away and fix broken U.S.
September 3, 2013: What I am saying is stay out of Syria.
September 5, 2013: The only reason President Obama wants to attack Syria is to save face over his very dumb RED LINE statement. Do NOT attack Syria,fix U.S.A.
September 5, 2013: AGAIN, TO OUR VERY FOOLISH LEADER, DO NOT ATTACK SYRIA - IF YOU DO MANY VERY BAD THINGS WILL HAPPEN & FROM THAT FIGHT THE U.S. GETS NOTHING!
Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
If Syria was forced to use Obamacare they would self-destruct without a shot being fired. Obama should sell them that idea!
6:49 PM - 6 Sep 2013
September 7, 2013: President Obama, do not attack Syria. There is no upside and tremendous downside. Save your "powder" for another (and more important) day!
September 9, 2013: Don't attack Syria - an attack that will bring nothing but trouble for the U.S. Focus on making our country strong and great again!
Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
This new Russian strategy guarantees victory for the Syrian government-and makes Obama and U.S. look hopelessly bad. President in trouble!
7:25 PM - 10 Sep 2013
As I remember Obama sent the issue over to congress and of course that meant they didn't want to take the responsibility of saying yes but Kerry worked out a deal with the Russians who just happen to be allies of Assad's and have had bases in Syria for many years. Syria's chemical weapons were supposed to have been destroyed or otherwise disposed of. But of course even if they did do away with all of them they still had the means to manufacture more.
I think the Trump administration letting Assad know that he wasn't going to be bothered by the United States was more than enough to encourage him to go ahead and start using the chemical weapons again. Given Trump's loving relationship with Putin I'm sure that nothing will be done about Assad during his administration. After all Assad is just another authoritarian regime.
So do you think Trump's cheap shot at Obama was justifiable.
|
|
|
10
Comments
|
|
Immunity for Flynn?
|
Posted:Mar 31, 2017 9:40 am
Last Updated:Jul 27, 2019 6:15 am
11859 Views
|
So it seems Mike Flynn is trying to get an immunity deal for his testimony. Yet he has said before that he did nothing wrong or at least that he can't remember having said anything wrong while talking to the Russian ambassador before trump took office. He has also said things like "Lock Her Up" and made some interesting comments about immunity concerning Hillary and her people as seen in the quote below.
Mike Flynn said...
"I mean, five people around her have had, have been given immunity to include her chief of staff,"....... " When you are given immunity, that means you have probably committed a crime."
In a September 2016 "Meet the Press" interview about Hillary's emails.
Oh and let's not forget Mike Flynn Jr's Pizzagate controversy or the original Mike Flynn's support of said fake news.
Hmmm, it was Flynn who lied to Pence wasn't it? Or maybe he was just a little misleading in his conversations with Pence. Or maybe he actually told Pence what was going on and it is Pence who is claiming he was lied to. Or maybe Pence knew what was going on because most everybody closely involved with trumps campaign was knowledgeable of the collusion with the Russians and the hacking as well as the bogus or should we say fake news campaigns against Hillary.
Perhaps Flynn is concerned about what may be revealed by the testimony of others such as Sally Yates or maybe it is the surveillance information that has him concerned.
How about the Turkey connection and the rather late filing of paperwork identifying himself as a foreign agent and of course we shouldn't forget the Russian work he did and all his connections there now should we?
It looks like the "House Intelligence Committee" has rejected the offer but Flynn has offered to the FBI and Congress, will they be interested? It seems his lawyer is trying to make a deal.
Maybe Flynn is feeling a bit of pressure or should I say anxiety about what might be revealed and has decided it would be better to hang "them" out to dry and get immunity then get caught himself, after all treason is not a laughing matter is it. Maybe he is even a little pissed about getting fired.
But given the circumstances is anything Mike Flynn says really reliable at this point. He could lie to save his ass or to get a payoff from certain Russians and trumps. He certainly hasn't demonstrated a love or respect for the truth so far has he? I wonder who it is that should be locked up.
We of course shouldn't forget the pardoning powers of the president now should we?
Devin Nunes, what a stupid bitch boy. Boss, boss... Seems he has forgotten who he works for.
Or is it all just fake news?
|
|
|
10
Comments
|
|
I wonder how many...
|
Posted:Mar 23, 2017 10:09 pm
Last Updated:Apr 1, 2017 3:05 pm
12331 Views
|
republicans and independents are going to have any interest in voting for trump if he doesn't get impeached or some other "unfortunate" event occur before the next presidential election?
I think the people might just be getting a bit disgusted with the performance of the republican party lately. 
Seems likely they are going to be paying for this show of incompetence and corporate obeisance not to mention cold hearted greed.
Take Back America!
|
|
|
10
Comments
|
|
I've always thought that government was for...
|
Posted:Mar 11, 2017 12:17 pm
Last Updated:Mar 14, 2017 10:58 am
14453 Views
|
National defense, law and order and to see that the citizens were treated fairly and justly and not abused by local or federal government or individuals or corporations.
As government and the country grew it became involved in education and expansion of infrastructure as well as regulation, though the regulation always was way behind the abuse that brought about the need for the regulation, and of course the tax burden increased.
As things got more complex it became necessary for the government to get involved in things like labor laws, environmental protection, voter rights and protections, drug, food and medicine regulations and protections, regulations for the radio traffic and aviation industry. There are many departments in government to regulate various industries and individuals in one way or another. Of course the tax burden went up but so has the population and big business.
The list goes on and on because there is one thing that has been a common problem... You see all these are just extensions of a more detailed nature of the original premises of the constitution. To protect the people from others that seek to take unfair advantage of them or injure them in some way. Most abuse has been from industry, corporations and big business that are not concerned with the people but with profit often at any cost to the worker or the environment. Wall street has only added to the problem by increasing the pressure to raise the value of a companies stock, leading to all sorts of abuses like very inaccurate prospectus portfolios to outright lies and all sorts of corruption including paying for government officials votes or other influence. Who is it that actively lobby's and even pays to keep the minimum wage low?
Eventually the government got involved in the social programs to help see to it that people who have worked all their lives making wages that were never enough to save much would have a safety network to keep them from being without any income when they got too old to work or to keep a job. These social programs grew to include people who weren't able to provide for themselves due to illness or injury including job related illnesses and injuries and birth defects (some of which have been caused by industries etc.). Many social programs were created to help those that needed the help for any number of reasons in many areas of life. Some programs helped people get by when they needed it temporarily and some are long term care programs while some help people to get ahead in life through education to where they don't need help anymore unless of course they get ill or injured.
It seems the republican government that's in charge right now, wants to eliminate as much of the regulations and agencies that have been created over the years to protect the people from big business and set back citizen protections to the 1800's. Anybody who knows anything from history, knows that removing these regulations will only recreate all the problems that caused the creation of these regulations in the first place. What kind of sense does it make to say "for every new regulation two will have to be thrown out"? Sounds like the height of ignorance to me.
But that's not all. This same republican administration wants to cutback or eliminate many social programs. The recent release of the republican healthcare plan, lets just call it "Republicans Don't Care Health Plan" because nobody wants to have their name on it and well, it is blatantly obvious from the contents that they don't care, shows they have no concept of the right thing to do. What kind of people cut back on things like health insurance, food assistance programs, assistance with cost for a place to live and all the other program cuts the republicans are making just so they can give a tax break to the wealthy and increase the military budget for a military that is the most costly and most advanced one in the world as is. Despotic dictators do things like this. Greedy rich boys do things like this. Republicans apparently do things like this also.
For a quick look at the republican healthcare plans problems read this or some other article if you like.
washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2017/03/07/the-new-republican-health-care-plan-is-awe-inspiringly-awful/?utm_term=.9d2338b0f6e4
|
|
|
7
Comments
|
|
I think I've figured it out...
|
Posted:Mar 9, 2017 9:01 pm
Last Updated:Mar 11, 2017 3:57 pm
14285 Views
|
Trumps people have clearly been hypnotized.
Those of them that met with Sergey Ivanovich Kislyak the Russian ambassador denied it, then when confronted with reality about their meetings said they couldn't remember what was discussed when they met Ambassador Kislyak.
Doesn't that sound like they have been hypnotized? "When I snap my fingers you will wake up and remember nothing..."
Is Kislyak a spy? Of course he is, he's a Russian Ambassador.
Is Kislyak a spy recruiter? Figure it out for yourself...
Is Kislyak a hypnotist?
|
|
|
5
Comments
|
|
What is Patriotism?
|
Posted:Mar 9, 2017 5:07 pm
Last Updated:Mar 11, 2017 9:27 am
14875 Views
|
Is it looking the other way when your government is tapping your telephone conversations?
Does it really matter if it is done in the name of collecting information from "suspected" terrorists?
Should it make a difference whether the people being spied on are citizens or not?
When someone, be it your government, or another, or some criminal is listening in through your television or your cell phone or your cars user interface system is it right? Is it acceptable in the name of catching those terrorists?
What about when the ability is abused by over zealous law enforcement or politically or personally motivated individuals or organizations?
What about when these abilities are being used by criminals to take advantage of you in some way?
Why do some people like to call it unpatriotic when someone exposes a spying apparatus?
What would McCain or any of the others be saying if it was the Russian spy network that had been tagged with this abuse?
Is it really patriotic to allow your government to develop and use spy networks that invade your privacy?
Should we expect a right to privacy in today's world?
One thing is certain power that can be abused will be abused, it is just a matter of time.
|
|
|
12
Comments
|
|
|
|
Russian dressing for your salad Mr Trump?
|
Posted:Mar 7, 2017 1:38 pm
Last Updated:Mar 8, 2017 6:23 pm
13439 Views
|
Alternate facts...
Alternate realities...
Alternate truths...
Alternate loyalties...
Alternate lies...
Anyone ready for an alternate president?
|
|
|
5
Comments
|
|
|
|
To link to this blog (tickles4us) use [blog tickles4us] in your messages.
|
|
|
| Sun |
Mon |
Tue |
Wed |
Thu |
Fri |
Sat |
| |
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
61
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
181
|
19
|
201
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
