So, there I was in bed, about 0558. I usually arise 0600-ish.
And my insides strongly suggested we visit the bathroom , loo, necessary, the throne, the ‘fresher’.
So, I bolted out of bed ( as quickly as a crippled 64-year-old can!)
And I made it! (Well almost…)
Fortunately, I was able to hit the raised toilet seat.
Unfortunately, I slipped whilst trying to sit!
And, in trying to re-position myself, again slipped!
And found myself almost reclining, with not enough arm strength to maneuver.
And one leg to try to use (the right leg being fairly useless – fused hip and all)
After about 10 minutes or so of wasting my time, (I asked Judy to get my left shoe, and put it on my left foot-obtaining possible traction. Not enough.
I wrapped again on her door, to call the fire department, to pick me up.
(What joy f0r them, a scantily dressed man, somewhat ‘soiled’, in need of elevation)
In about seven minutes, they arrived, picked me up, made certain I could stand and was ambulatory. And left!
No medical check or questions!
Did they ask if anything was injured or broken? Heart attack? They didn’t even check my pulse!
There main concern was getting me into the shower…
AND, they left.
I showered, dressed, checked in with Judy, and began my day. Late!
(Don’t get me wrong! I am GLAD they were here to help. Just wish they were more concerned anout my health.)
( from NRA-ILA)
This week (September 8), the city of Tucson, Arizona agreed to repeal their firearm destruction ordinance. This decision came in response to the recent state Supreme Court ruling that struck down the city’s firearm destruction policy as a violation of state law that prohibits local governments from regulating the ownership, licensing, or use of firearms.
The city of Tucson ignored this Arizona state law 12 years ago when the Tucson city council passed an ordinance allowing for the destruction of firearms. Last month, the state Supreme Court struck down the ordinance as violation of state law, and in its ruling specifically acknowledged the NRA’s amicus filing by adopting its argument “that preserving the right to bear arms under the federal and state constitutions is also a subject of state concern.”
“We applaud the Arizona Supreme Court’s ruling,” said Chris Cox, executive director of NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action. “Firearms should not be summarily destroyed by local governments.”
Chris Cox issued a statement thanking the Arizona Attorney General for his efforts in assisting Arizona’s law-abiding gun owners.
“On behalf of the NRA’s five-million members, I want to thank Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich for his defense of Arizona’s firearm preemption law,” concluded Cox. “This decision sets an important precedent to protect Arizonans’ firearms freedoms from future infringement by local ordinances.”
(I must assume it applies to other financial institutions, as well!)
ACH PAYMENTS ARE CHANGING
Beginning September 15th, 2017, the Federal Reserve will start processing most ACH debits (also known as electronic payments) on the same day that the transactions are made. This means that some of your payments could come out of your account faster than they have in the past.
To avoid overdraft charges or insufficient fund fees, please ensure that your available account balance is enough to pay any debits or withdrawals at the time you write or authorize them.
3 TIPS TO BE PREPARED
1 Plan for immediate transactions: Whenever you pay for something, the best practice is to expect that your transactions will be processed the same day.
2 Know your balances: It makes good financial sense to make sure that your balances can support your spending. Keep on top of them with online banking or with the (Credit Onion) app for Apple or Android!
3 Be aware of different kinds of ACH debits: ACH debits can also be things like writing paper checks to grocery stores or using debit cards from retailers, such as Target or Nordstrom.
For those of you out there of limited means who ‘use the float’, as they said in check kiting days of yore!
(Not that I’ve ever done that! 😉 )
(from Liberty Headlines)
(CNS News) Rep. Tom McClintock (R.-Calif.) said on the House floor on Thursday that Senate Republicans had surrendered operational control of the Senate to Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.)—and that the debt limit and spending dealt that President Donald Trump had made with Schumer was evidence of that.
McClintock argued that the ultimate problem was the Republican Senate leadership’s unwillingness to reform a cloture rule that allows the minority party to block virtually all substantive legislation that the minority does not want to see enacted.
He noted that, by contrast, the Senate had reformed the cloture rule on Supreme Court nominations, thus allowing the confirmation of Justice Neil Gorsuch. But, then, House leaders fearing a filibuster in the Senate declined to move forward with a substantial repeal of Obamacare.“Earlier this year, the Senate briefly recognized this and chose to reform cloture for Supreme Court nominations, but not for the legislation absolutely vital to the interests of our country,” McClintock said.
“The news yesterday that the President has now had to capitulate to Democratic demands on the debt limit should come as no surprise,” he said. “By failing to reform cloture, Senate Republicans have effectively given Chuck Schumer operational control of the Senate.”
“That is how we got wrapped around the axle on repealing and replacing Obamacare,” McClintock said. “The House could have passed a comprehensive bill that completely and cleanly abolished Obamacare and fully replaced it with all of the market and tax reforms that Republicans agreed with and campaigned on, popular reforms that put consumers back in charge of their healthcare decisions and placed those decisions within their financial reach…
Now, I’m a libertarian, so I don’t have a dog in this fight. (But, if I must choose, it’s more often with the Republicans than the Democrats.)
But, I did expect certain conservative Republicans to reverse some of the last administration’s follies.
(or any other interested parties)
New Arizona Laws
The 2017 legislative session ended on May 10. Laws passed during a session are generally effective 90 days after adjournment. The following pro-rights bills will become law on August 9. You can view the status of all the bills AzCDL monitored during the session at our website’s Bill Tracking page.
HB 2216 (Rep. Paul Boyer, R-LD20) makes it unlawful to require a person to use or subject themselves to electronic firearm tracking technology, a component of “smart gun” technology that limits the operation of a firearm as well as tracking its location and logging its use.
SB 1122 (Sen. Gail Griffin, R-LD14) prohibits a city, town, county, or the state from requiring the search of any federal or state database as a requirement for transferring personal property, such as your firearm. Passage of this law should help complicate efforts we expect to see requiring “universal background checks” on private firearm transfers in Arizona.
SB 1344 (Sen. John Kavanagh, R-LD23) is the AzCDL-requested bill that clarifies that state and local governments cannot regulate the possession of weapons by employees or contractors in or on their privately owned property or vehicles. This bill grew out of over-zealous local governments believing they can control all aspects of an employee’s or independent contractor’s private life.
Ballot Measure Reforms
The Constitution of Arizona, along with several other states, contains a provision influenced by the “Progressive” (i.e., Socialist) movement of the early 20th Century. This provision allows for changes in state law, or even the Constitution itself, via a “citizen initiative” ballot measure bypassing the legislative process. All that’s required to put an issue on the ballot are petition signatures from a small percentage of registered voters. Unlike other states, once a citizen initiative ballot measure is passed in Arizona it can never be overturned by the Legislature.
Billionaire and former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has been exploiting this weakness in state constitutions to further his drive to disarm law abiding Americans. In 2014 he successfully used the ballot measure process to achieve gun owner registration via “universal background checks” in the state of Washington. In 2015, the Oregon legislature accommodated Bloomberg by passing similar laws. In 2016, a Bloomberg backed ballot measure passed in Nevada. We expect to see a Bloomberg backed ballot measure calling for “universal background checks” in Arizona, possibly in 2018.
This year the Legislature passed, and the Governor signed, two laws that restore integrity to Arizona’s petition gathering process for ballot measures.
HB 2244 requires strict compliance to the ballot referendum constitutional and statutory requirements.
HB 2404 prohibits payment to petition “circulators” based on the number of signatures collected. It also invalidates signatures collected by a paid circulator who fails to register with the Secretary of State. New provisions have been added for challenging a ballot measure. Apparently this new law is so threatening to those who want to take your rights away that a ballot petition has already been filed to overturn the provisions of HB 2404 in 2018.
We expect bigger challenges next year. Those who want to disarm you, realizing that there is little chance of restricting your rights at the national level, are redoubling their efforts at the state level where they have the greatest chances to succeed. Arizona is their number one target. Stay alert. Don’t succumb to “Trump Sleep.”
These alerts are a project of the Arizona Citizens Defense League (AzCDL), an all-volunteer, non-profit, non-partisan grassroots organization.
AzCDL – Protecting Your Freedom
A new Oregon gun control law was recently passed by the governor in an attempt to establish Extreme Risk Protection orders. The governor, who signed the bill with no comment remarked previously that the new law was the, “best way to ensure that a person who is at risk of harming themselves or others is identified, while still ensuring their rights are protected by a court review.”
Unfortunately, the law is a far cry from being protective of individual gun owners’ rights as it allows police to confiscate a valid owner’s firearm without providing them with their day in court before the confiscation occurs. While those affected by the law would have a right to be heard in court, the owner would not be able to appeal their rights in court until after they have been revoked.
In essence, the law is multi-faceted allowing police officers to confiscate a gun owner’s weapon if the police, a family member, or close friend reports that they pose a risk to themselves or others. Once the order is established by the court, the individual will be prevented from buying firearms or ammunition for the duration of a year, and the police will have the right to seize the owner’s weapons or require them to be stored with a gun dealer for the duration of the order.
While this new law was created to reduce the risk of firearm related suicides that has been on the rise in recent years, it is doing it at the expense of law-abiding citizen’s rights and requires them to prove that they are not a danger to themselves or others. This situation could cause many well-meaning family members and friends to have their loved one’s rights stripped from them for something that may be no more than an unfounded concern or an attempt at revenge.
In the United States, a citizen has the right to due process, which requires that a person is informed of the crime they are being charged with as well as the rights they are entitled to during the criminal process. After they are informed, they may be temporarily detained until they are seen by a judge. The proceedings will then proceed to trial and a sentencing phase if convicted, but during this entire process, a citizen’s rights may not be limited until they are convicted and sentenced in a court of law.
The new Oregon law SB 719A will have citizens subject to the restriction of rights based on suspicion or presumption. It is then their responsibility if they want those rights back to schedule a hearing and prove they deserve them, in essence violating some of the most important laws that established the founding of this country.
In addition to the fact that the law will allow citizens to be stripped of their 2nd amendment right to bear arms before they are granted the right to due process, it will also put the determination of one’s mental state and intention in the hands of people that are not qualified in the mental health field or even have the tools to make a valid determination on one’s mental health. Quite simply we have mental health professional make these types of assessments because they are the ones who are properly trained to do so.
The new law also provides gun restriction requirements for those who have had a restraining order filed against them by a significant other as well as allowing the indefinite delay of gun sales to be completed. The previous law gave the state three days to determine whether or not a gun purchase could go through. With the new law, this period could be extended indefinitely, which in effect will inhibit a citizen’s right to obtain personal protection.
While the intentions of the new gun confiscation law in Oregon may have started with good intentions, to achieve the desired results, the state is allowing law-abiding citizens to be stripped of their rights without due process and proper assessment. The new law will end up having more citizen’s in court explaining why they deserve their rights instead of the court system fighting to protect the rights of their citizens.
Whatever happened to DUE PROCESS?
Of course, Oregon is rapidly becoming California North. And Washington isn’t far behind. Seems the pioneer spirit that brought folks westerly stopped at Idaho, Utah and Arizona.
This seems to be prevalent on both coasts.
Cataracts (insert joke about Japanese luxury cars here!)
Seriously, I already was aware I had them, from my last eye exam.
As a card-carrying diabetic, I am supposed to have my head examined, ahem EYES examined, annually.
I obtained secondary eye/dental insurance for this year, having used MEDICARE previously.
The problem was, I traditionally was examined in January, and hadn’t met my deductible yet! And $150 is difficult to acquire.
SO, I obtained a secondary. Which also had a deductible. And as normally I would only see my ophthalmologist once annually….
You get the idea.
Suddenly, my primary health care insurer called me. “Why haven’t you had your diabetic eye exam yet?”
“Well, I don’t have the cash!”
My primary insurer told me they would cover the exam, as long as I stayed in their network. I would only pay my specialist fee. $25.00.
The call was last week. I saw the eye doc Tuesday THIS week!
Cataracts? Yes. Something may need to be done in three to five years.
My retinas? (the big concern of diabetics and their doctors). EXCELLENT!
Next, I need to scare up funds to get new glasses, and I am golden.
Politics works in mysterious ways. The more firearm regulations former President Obama tried to push through Congress, the higher gun sales became. Obama himself was lampooned as “the best gun salesman on the planet” by some industry insiders.
Obviously, the threat of overbearing regulation has faded in the era of the Trump administration. While one may think that a loosening of the reins would encourage more gun sales, the exact opposite has occurred. Gun stocks are down, and so are profits.
What is the explanation?
For all of his bluster, Obama was actually able to do very little about regulating firearms during his time in office. Yes, he was successful in bolstering the amount of total background checks processed. However, the Congress blocked all of his traditional legislation on the issue, and his Executive Orders addressing the topic have been all but completely overturned.
As it turns out, Americans were buying more guns on the threat of gun regulation rather than on any actual policy. Because Americans thought that certain types of rifles and add-ons such as sidearm silencers would soon be difficult or impossible to get, they stocked up. With Trump, there is no talk of gun regulation. Second Amendment rights advocates are no longer in a frenzy thinking that gun rights will disappear in the near future, so the new additions to the cache can wait.
The second factor that may account for a drop in gun sales is a level of satiety in the market. When Americans stocked up on guns during Obama’s term, they really stocked up. Contrary to popular belief, the modern American under Trump believes that they have enough guns – for now.
The Trump slump is a serious issue for the firearms industry. Mid America Armament gun show sales have dropped 50%, with total sales down about 25% from Obama administration years. The former Smith & Wesson, now known as the American Outdoor Brands Corporation, had its stock price drop significantly on election day. Sturm Ruger faced similar losses in its stock price.
Financial analysts predicted firearm sales would take a hit as far back as November. Learn why in the video below.
~ Firearm Daily
“When in danger or in doubt, run in circles scream and shout!” (from a 1920’s Naval Academy magazine)
We political gun folks seem to become apoplectic when those in power even suggest possible gun control legislation. But we become complacent when the people in power seem to support gun rights.
Not so fast, there, Bucko! Historically, there have been a number or Republicans (Conservatives?) in power who signed in legislation which was antithetical to the Constitution, and that which is near-and-dear to us.
Tried to buy a newly-made European machine gun lately?
We must remain vigilant and (if we are able) support the marketplace.
Lest more of our rights whither or be taken away!
(from American Gun News, in part)
Google and other companies in the Silicon Valley are no longer content to simply donate as much spare cash as possible to anti-gun candidates for federal office. The tech moguls in the bluest of blue districts in the United States have chosen a side in the culture wars and are taking direct aim at the 2nd Amendment. Here is how Google and other tech giants are actively working to turn people against your gun rights.
eBay was the first tech giant to ban firearms sales from its platform, but Google was not far behind. This should come as no surprise considering the eight-year game of “musical chairs” between Google and the notoriously anti-Second Amendment Obama administration. A staggering 258 executives and government employees rotated jobs through the revolving door between the Obama White House and Google between 2009 and 2016. At the end of Barack Obama’s first term, Google suddenly banned the sale of firearms from its shopping platform, declaring guns and ammo to not be “family safe.” Not family safe? That bigoted statement alone has the power to shape public perception about firearms.
Then consider the creepy report from the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology in 2015. Researchers discovered that Google’s search algorithm can manipulate 20 percent or more of undecided voters to switch their votes!
Robert Epstein, the senior research psychologist on the study, told Politico that Google has the ability to “control a wide variety of opinions and beliefs … [more] than any company in history has ever had.” If Google can trick people into switching their voting preferences, it’s easy to see that it could be doing the same thing with opinions on gun rights.
This social media giant has been moving toward becoming an online shopping platform more and more in recent years, but in 2016 Facebook suddenly began treating gun owners as pariahs. To this day, Facebook refuses to say how many gun enthusiast pages it took down in a massive purge when it rolled out a new policy to ban the private sales of firearms — which are legal in most states.
Facebook has assigned a liaison to help bring gun enthusiast pages into compliance with its policy, but many gun owners simply abandoned the platform and went elsewhere, according to Forbes. This is just another instance of a giant Silicon Valley company treating gun owners as second-class citizens, with a separate set of rules and regulations that other retailers do not have to abide by. This is compounded by anti-gun activists poring over Facebook posts and flagging anything related to guns as “offensive” until Facebook takes the post or a user’s entire page down.
Insiders at Twitter admitted in 2016 that the company has been shadowbanning the tweets of prominent conservatives, including many Second Amendment patriots. A “shadowban” is simply a form of censorship in which the tech giant that censors you never tells you that you’ve been censored. You can still tweet a picture of that new sidearm you purchased, but none of your friends or family members will ever see it because it was shadowbanned. Many Facebook users have reported that their posts have been shadowbanned as well.
Online services PayPal, Stripe and Square have all banned gun stores from using their platforms for business. Never mind that these are lawful businesses operated by federal firearms license holders who conduct background checks before all sales.
Gladwin Guns and Ammo in Merced, CA filed a lawsuit against the three Silicon Valley money transfer services in June of 2017. Owner Blair Gladwin told the Merced Sun-Times, “They flat-out shut me down. My livelihood is on the line, because my revenue is going to drop.” 2nd Amendment enthusiasts will want to keep an eye on this case, because it could have a nationwide impact on whether lawful gun stores are allowed to use the same services as most other businesses.
Google and other tech giants are sending gun owners, gun shops and people who simply support gun rights to the “back of the bus” in 2017. Constant discrimination like this against gun owners does have an impact on public perception and this is a problem that all gun owners should be concerned with — especially knowing the tremendous power that the Silicon Valley wields with its vast troves of data on Americans.
This should be of no surprise, as Northern California (and California in general) is a bastion of liberal political thought. It is surprising that Amazon (farther North in Washington State), while not selling firearms, does allow sale of accessories, stocks, lubricants and novelty items (a chocolate Glock?).
The problem is, unless we ‘protest’ these entities by going off the grid (no cellular telephones, tablets, payment platforms or social networking, or using their services), they will continue to make huge dollars unabated. And continue to ‘control’ the masses.
aka ♫ When Will They Ever Learn? When Will they EVER Learn ♫ ?
I like diet soda. I’ve been consuming large quantities of it since the late 70’s, when I largely gave up sugar.
It also provides me caffeine, as I drink little coffee.
And, my daily allowance of chemicals I know are not good for me!
I remember back in the 80’s, when New Coke came into the marketplace. Not diet, but a big deal in the soft drink world. And it flopped. People liked the previous formula.
Remember Pepsi Clear, Pepsi Free and numerous other attempts by the soda industry to corner and expand the market?
Well, the Coca Cola Company is at it again.
When they initially came out with Diet Coke, I was heartbroken. The (then) wife and I were ardent fans of Tab, with it’s high caffeine and no sugar. I even bought a few two liter bottles and squirreled them away for an upcoming anniversary (my wife didn’t drink).
And when Tab began disappearing from the shelves and Diet Coke replaced it, we bit-the-bullet and gave it a try.
A few months later, the anniversary rolled around, and to both our surprises, we had developed a taste for Diet Coke. And the shelved, vintage Tab tasted funny!
Fast forward to the 00’s. A long-time Diet Coke fan, it was announced another diet drink would be added to the mix. Coke Zero. Alleged to taste closer to real Coke!
So, I gave it a try.
Lo and behold it was closer to original Coke (which I loved in days of yor). Spiciness had been added! Soon my Diet Coke addiction had been replaced by Coke Zero.
And all was right with the World!
But, ‘they’ cannot leave well enough alone. It was announced in July, that Coke Zero sales hadn’t met their expectations, and production will end at the end of August!
And replaced with Coca-Cola Zero Sugar! With ‘improved’ taste!
Well, last time I went for Zero, it was there, but had not been faced, and this old cripple couldn’t bend to reach it! So, I grabbed some CCZS.
Bland. It lacks the zip of original Coke or the spiciness of Zero.
They still make small productions of Tab, if I can find it…