Ladies, you don’t have to look. Men will be looking. I traditionally post the cover of Sports Illustrated Swimsuit edition.
More photos of Kate Upton here.
Ladies, you don’t have to look. Men will be looking. I traditionally post the cover of Sports Illustrated Swimsuit edition.
More photos of Kate Upton here.
The price to visit Disneyland and California Adventure is going up.
Disneyland and Disney California Adventure price increases are shown in this graphic from between 2000 and 2017.
ANAHEIM >> The price to visit Disneyland and Disney California Adventure – for either a day or with a year’s pass – is going up again.
Effective today, Sunday, it will cost $97 to go to one of the parks on Value days, the lowest-priced days of the year, up $2.
A visit on a Regular day will be $110, while a Peak day will cost $124, both up $5. Tickets are more on days when demand would be higher.
Parking is going to $20 from $18.
The price to visit Disneyland and Disney California Adventure – for either a day or with a year’s pass – is going up again. Effective this Sunday, it will cost $97 to go to one of the parks on Value days, the lowest-priced days of the year, up $2.
Since 2000, a single-day admission price to Disneyland has tripled on Peak days, with ticket prices going up at least once a year since 2002.
“Our pricing provides guests a range of options that allow us to better manage demand to maximize the guest experience and is reflective of the distinctly Disney offerings at all of our parks,” said Suzi Brown, a Disneyland spokeswoman.
Reaction to the announcement was swift on Saturday.
“Four hundred dollars for a family of 3 to get into the gate (on peak days),” said Tony Diamante, 57, of Temecula. “I can afford it, but this is a week’s pay for someone making $15 to $18 an hour, depending of course on taxes.”
James H. Carter II, 40 from Huntington Beach, who runs a podcast called Creepy Kingdom, said tourists will continue to pay.
“As a traveler, it doesn’t matter how much it cost. You booked the hotel, you flew down or drove down, an extra $10 is not really going to deter you,” he said. “It’s unfortunate for the consumer but Disney raising tickets a few dollars is not going to stop people from coming.”
Jay Valles, 31, of Whittier said he was a former annual pass holder but discontinued and stopped visiting the park last year because of price increases and overcrowding.
He said while Disneyland is still a better value compared to other live entertainment options, Disney needs to get rid of the monthly payment options for annual pass holders to really lessen the crowds at the park.
Disney officials said the monthly payment option that makes their annual passes more financially bearable will continue.
“If they really wanted to control demand, they would do away with monthly payments,” Valles said. “Also, a one day, one park ticket is still a good price compared to a concert ticket or a show on Broadway…[But] If the pricing was high and the crowds were moderate I would return to visit.”
Last year, in an effort to spread out the crowds, Disney introduced its three-level pricing. Some observers say the tiered pricing structure has worked, with less people flocking to the park, for example, on the highest-demand two-week period including Christmas and New Year’s Day.
Prices for some annual passes will go up, too.
The Southern California Select and Southern California passes will be $339 and $469, respectively, $10 increases. Both passes have blackout days. The monthly payment option remains.
The Deluxe pass, with some Saturday and peak-holiday-period blackout days, is getting boosted by $20 to $619. The prices for the higher-end passes will remain the same.
In 2015, Disneyland posted an all-time record with 18.2 million visitors, an increase of 1.5 million from the previous year, according to the Themed Entertainment Association, an industry group that tracks theme park attendance.
Meanwhile, neighboring Disney California Adventure also reached record attendance with 9.3 million visitors.
However, according to Walt Disney Co.’s latest fiscal report, overall recent attendance is down 5 percent but revenue is up at Disney’s domestic theme parks. The company does not publicly break that number down for individual parks, though.
But with the Guardians of the Galaxy attraction opening this summer at Disney California Adventure, and a “Star Wars” land at Disneyland expected to land in 2019, demand should continue to be high for the Anaheim theme parks.
BY THE NUMBERS
Here’s what it cost to enter Disneyland between 2000 and now:
• 2000: $41 and $43 (price went up twice)
• 2002: $45
• 2003: $47
• 2004: $49.75
• 2005: $53 and $56 (price went up twice)
• 2006: $59 and $63 (price went up twice)
• 2007: $66
• 2008: $69
• 2009: $72
• 2010: $76
• 2011: $80
• 2012: $87
• 2013: $92
• 2014: $96
• 2015: $99
• 2016: $95, $105, $119 (depending on the day)
• 2017: $97, $110, $124 (depending on the day)
Source: Orange County Register archives; Los Angeles Daily News
U.S. President Donald Trump has a history of saying false things, big and small. Canada’s Toronto Star newspaper’s Washington Bureau reporter Daniel Dale has been tracking them all.
This is Mr. Dale’s current running tally of the bald-faced lies, exaggerations and deceptions the president of the United States of America has said, so far.
33. Feb. 3, 2017 — Twitter
The claim: “Thank you to Prime Minister of Australia for telling the truth about our very civil conversation that FAKE NEWS media lied about.”
In fact: The media did not lie about their phone call, which was not civil. A senior Trump official acknowledged to the Washington Post that it had been “hostile and charged,” and prominent news outlets in both countries reported that Trump had berated Malcolm Turnbull. Turnbull denied that Trump had “hung up” on him, but he did not deny that the call had ended abruptly after 25 minutes, as the Post reported. “Was it cut short?” an Australian radio host pressed Turnbull. “The call ended courteously. That’s all I want to say about that,” Turnbull responded.
32. Feb. 2, 2017 — White House meeting with Harley-Davidson
The claim: “I love Australia as a country, but we had a problem where for whatever reason, President Obama said that they were going to take probably well over 1,000 illegal immigrants who were in prisons, and they were going to bring them and take them into this country. And I just said, ‘Why?’…1,250. It could be 2,000, it could be more than that.”
In fact: The people in question are refugees, not illegal immigrants, who are living in island detention centres off of Australia. As Australia’s prime minister repeatedly told Trump, and as Trump’s own press secretary concurred, the agreement covers 1,250 people, not 2,000.
31. Feb 2, 2017 — Twitter
The repeated claim: “Do you believe it? The Obama Administration agreed to take thousands of illegal immigrants from Australia.”
In fact: The people in question are refugees, not illegal immigrants; the agreement covers 1,250 people, not “thousands.”
30. Feb. 2, 2017 — Twitter
The claim: “Iran was on its last legs and ready to collapse until the U.S. came along and gave it a lifeline in the form of the Iran Deal: $150 billion.”
In fact: Iran was nowhere near collapse before it signed the 2015 nuclear deal with the U.S. and five other major countries. Iran did not get $150 billion in the deal. Rather, a smaller amount of Iranian assets were unfrozen. The Treasury Department told Congress in 2015 that total Iranian assets were estimated at $100 billion to $125 billion; it put the “usable liquid assets” at around $50 billion. John Kerry, then the secretary of state, said Iran would get about $55 billion.
29. Jan. 30, 2017 —Remarks at the White House
The claim: “But we cut approximately $600 million off the F-35 fighter, and that only amounts to 90 planes out of close to 3,000 planes. And when you think about $600 million, it was announced by Marillyn (Hewson), who’s very talented, the head of Lockheed Martin. I got involved in that about a month ago. A lot was put out, and when they say a lot, a lot meant about 90 planes. They were having a lot of difficulty. There was no movement and I was able to get $600 million approximately off those planes.”
In fact: Whether or not Trump secured additional discounts from Lockheed, he is wrong that there had been “no movement” until he got involved: the company had been moving to cut the price well before Trump was elected, multiple aviation and defence experts say. Just a week after Trump’s election, the head of the F-35 program announced a reduction of 6 to 7 per cent — in the $600 million to $700 million range.
“Trump’s claimed $600 million cut is right in the ballpark of what the price reduction was going to be all along,” wrote Popular Mechanics. “Bottom line: Trump appears to be taking credit for years of work by the Pentagon and Lockheed,” Aviation Week reported, per the Washington Post.
28. Jan. 30, 2017 — Twitter
The claim: “Only 109 people out of 325,000 were detained and held for questioning. Big problems at airports were caused by Delta computer outage, protesters and the tears of Senator Schumer.”
In fact: This is false and misleading in multiple ways. The Delta computer outage happened a full day and a half after the chaos over Trump’s ban on all new refugees and on travel by nationals from seven mostly Muslim countries. The peaceful protesters at airports did not cause “big problems.” Nor, of course, did Schumer’s emotional speech.
In reality, the poorly explained order caused confusion around the word, resulting in hassles at airports and beyond for tens of thousands of people — far more than were detained upon entry. And while it is not clear if Trump was correct that “only” 109 people had been detained at the time, Homeland Security officials said a day later that 721 people had been denied boarding.
27. Jan. 29, 2017 — Facebook statement on travel ban affecting seven predominantly Muslim countries
The claim: “My policy is similar to what President Obama did in 2011 when he banned visas for refugees from Iraq for six months.”
In fact: Trump is wrong that Obama “banned” Iraqi refugees. After two Iraqi refugees were arrested on terrorism charges, Obama increased scrutiny of new refugee applicants, slowing down the process significantly, but did not ban Iraqis entirely or ban all new refugees. Iraqi refugees were admitted to the U.S. in every month of 2011, government figures show, and 9,388 were admitted in total in 2011.
26. Jan. 28, 2017 — Twitter
The claim: “Thr (sic) coverage about me in the @nytimes and the @washingtonpost gas (sic) been so false and angry that the times actually apologized to its dwindling subscribers and readers.”
In fact: This claim is false in two ways. First, the Times’ subscriber base is growing, not dwindling: the company says it added more than 300,000 subscribers in the fourth quarter of 2016. Second, the Times never apologized for its Trump coverage; Trump was referring to a post-election letter, a kind of sales pitch, in which Times leaders thanked readers and said they planned to “rededicate ourselves to the fundamental mission of Times journalism.”
25. Jan. 27, 2017 — Interview with Christian Broadcasting Network’s David Brody
The claim: “Do you know if you were a Christian in Syria it was impossible, very very, at least very very tough to get into the United States? If you were a Muslim you could come in, but if you were a Christian, it was almost impossible.”
In fact: There is no basis for the claim that U.S. authorities are treating Christian applicants from Syria worse than they treated Muslims. While a very small percentage of the Syrian refugees accepted by the U.S. in 2016 were Christian — 0.5 per cent, according to FactCheck.org — Christians make up a similarly tiny percentage of the Syrian refugees in nearby countries: 1.5 per cent in Lebanon, 0.2 per cent in Jordan.
24. Jan. 27, 2017 — Interview with Christian Broadcasting Network’s David Brody
The claim: “The Cuban-Americans — I got 84 per cent of that vote, and they voted in big numbers.”
In fact: Trump got nowhere near that percentage of the Cuban-American vote. Writes NBC: “According to exit polls, Trump won 54 per cent of the Cuban American vote in Florida, where two-thirds of people of Cuban descent live. Latino Decisions’ election eve poll showed he got about 48 per cent of the Cuban American vote nationally and 52 per cent in Florida.”
23. Jan. 27, 2017 — Press conference with United Kingdom Prime Minister Theresa May
The claim: “I happened to be in Scotland at Turnberry cutting a ribbon when Brexit happened and we had a vast amount of press there. And I said Brexit — this was the day before, you probably remember, I said Brexit is going to happen and I was scorned in the press for making that prediction. I was scorned.”
In fact: Trump was not in Scotland the day before the Brexit vote. He was there the day after. When he was asked about Brexit the day before the vote, he told Fox Business, “I don’t think anybody should listen to me because I haven’t really focused on it very much.” He did not venture a prediction that day.
22. Jan. 26, 2017 —Interview with Fox News’s Sean Hannity
The claim (on companies creating jobs): “Here’s another thing with the media. ‘Oh, they would’ve done it anyway. They weren’t going to do it.’ You see, Jack Ma. He had no intention of doing it until I got elected. And he went down and he said, ‘I’m only going to do this because of Donald Trump.’ And nobody put that in the papers, which is OK.”
In fact: It is not exactly clear whether Ma made his proposal to “create one million” U.S. jobs as a direct result of Trump’s election, but Trump’s claim about media bias is false regardless: upon coming down the elevator at Trump Tower, Ma, the executive chairman of Chinese e-commerce company Alibaba, did not actually tell reporters that he had made the proposal “because of Donald Trump.” He said nothing of that sort at all.
21. Jan. 26, 2017 — Interview with Fox News’s Sean Hannity
The claim: “And a wall protects. All you have to do is ask Israel. They were having a total disaster coming across and they had a wall. It’s 99.9 per cent stoppage.”
In fact: Exact numbers do not exist, but Israel’s barrier with the West Bank stops far fewer than “99.9 per cent” of people who seek to cross. The New York Times reported at length last year on “a thriving smuggling industry that allows untold numbers of people to pass over, under, through or around what Israelis call the security barrier.” A police spokesman said “hundreds” of illegal crossers were detained every week.
20. Jan. 26, 2017 — Interview with Fox News’s Sean Hannity
The claim (on refugees): “We’ve taken in tens of thousands of people. We know nothing about them. They can say they vet them. They didn’t vet them. They have no papers. How can you vet somebody when you don’t know anything about them and you have no papers?”
In fact: Refugees to the U.S. are rigorously vetted. The process includes multiple kinds of background and security checks and at least two interviews with U.S. representatives. Regardless of their paperwork situation, and regardless of one’s opinion on how good the vetting is, the U.S. knows far more than “nothing” about the refugees it approves.
19. Jan. 26, 2017 —Speech to Republican legislators at retreat in Philadelphia
The claim: “Here in Philadelphia, the murder rate has been steady — I mean, just terribly increasing.”
In fact: The number of Philadelphia homicides in 2016, 277, was actually down from the 280 in 2015. While both years represented an increase from 2013 (246 homicides) and 2014 (248 homicides), the overall trend has been downward: Philadelphia had 391 homicides in 2007 and 331 in 2008. The number of homicides as of Jan. 31, 30, was higher than the 19 at the same time in 2016 but about the same as the 27 in 2015. Regardless, the murder rate is never calculated on a month of data.
18. Jan. 25 — Interview with ABC’s David Muir
The claim (about Chicago): “So, look, when President Obama was there two weeks ago making a speech, very nice speech. Two people were shot and killed during his speech. You can’t have that.”
In fact: There were not only no homicides during Obama’s speech but no shootings at all, the Chicago Tribune reported based on police data.
17. Jan. 25, 2017 — Interview with ABC’s David Muir
The claim: “Look, Barack Obama — if you look back, eight years ago when he first ran — he was running for office in Chicago … and he was laughing at the system because he knew all of those votes were going to him … he was smiling and laughing about the vote in Chicago.”
In fact: This is a gross mischaracterization of Obama’s remarks and behaviour during the 2008 campaign. He did not laugh or smile about the voting system in Chicago, and he did not suggest in any way that he was going to be receiving fraudulent votes. He acknowledged that his party had sometimes “monkeyed” with Chicago elections “in the past.”
16. Jan. 25, 2017 — Interview with ABC’s David Muir
The claim: Regarding voting fraud: “You look at Philadelphia, you look at what’s going on in Philadelphia.”
In fact: There is no evidence of a significant voter fraud problem in Philadelphia.
15.Jan. 25, 2017 — Interview with ABC’s David Muir
The claim: Regarding voting fraud: “Chicago, look what’s going on in Chicago. It’s only gotten worse.”
In fact: There is no evidence of a significant voter fraud problem in Chicago, and there is no evidence that its voting system has become increasingly plagued by fraud.
14.Jan. 25, 2017 — Interview with ABC’s David Muir
The claim: Regarding his false claim of “millions” of possible illegal voters: “Those were Hillary votes. And if you look at it they all voted for Hillary. They all voted for Hillary. They didn’t vote for me. I don’t believe I got one. OK, these are people that voted for Hillary Clinton.”
In fact: These large numbers of illegal voters did not “all” vote for Clinton because they do not exist. Even if they did, it would be impossible for Trump to know that not a single one voted for him, since the ballot is secret. This claim is simply absurd.
13.Jan. 25, 2017 — Interview with ABC’s David Muir
The claim: “Now you’re telling me Pew report has all of a sudden changed.”
In fact: Trump was trying to use a 2012 Pew report as supposed evidence of widespread voter fraud. Muir told him he was wrong — not because the report changed but because it never showed what Trump falsely claims it showed. “The Pew study I directed doesn’t address voter fraud at all,” report leader David Becker told the Washington Post this weekend. Rather, the study addresses non-fraud voter registration issues, such as people remaining on one state’s rolls after they move to another.
12.Jan. 25, 2017 — Interview with ABC’s David Muir
The claim: Muir: “I called the author of the Pew report last night. And he told me that they found no evidence of voter fraud.” Trump: “Really? Then why did he write the report?” Muir: “He said no evidence of voter fraud.” Trump: “Excuse me, then why did he write the report? According to Pew report, then he’s — then he’s grovelling again.”
In fact: Grovelling means “to draw back or crouch down in fearful submission.” Becker is doing the opposite: publicly explaining his work, and explaining why the president is wrong.
11. Jan. 25, 2017 — Interview with ABC’s David Muir
The claim: Regarding Healthcare.gov: “Remember the $5 billion website?”
In fact: Healthcare.gov did not cost $5 billion. The Obama administration offered a figure of less than $1 billion, while an analysis by Bloomberg found that it cost just over $2 billion.
10.Jan. 25, 2017 — Interview with ABC’s David Muir
The claim: With regard to his speech to the Central Intelligence Agency earlier in the week: “They showed the people applauding and screaming and they were all CIA. There was — somebody was asking (press secretary) Sean (Spicer) – ‘Well, were they Trump people that were put’ — we don’t have Trump people. They were CIA people.”
In fact: Most of the audience was indeed made up of CIA personnel, but Trump is wrong that there were no “Trump people.” Spicer told the press that “maybe 10” people in attendance were part of Trump’s entourage; CBS News reported that an official familiar with the event said Spicer was inaccurate, as Trump and his allies brought about 40 people.
9.Jan. 25, 2017 — Interview with ABC’s David Muir
The claim: “I think you’re demeaning by talking the way you’re talking. I think you’re demeaning. And that’s why I think a lot of people turned on you and turned on a lot of other people. And that’s why you have a 17 per cent approval rating, which is pretty bad.”
In fact: Saying “you” here, Trump wrongly conveys the impression that Muir himself has 17 per cent approval. In fact, there is no polling on Muir. Trump appears to have actually been referring to a 2016 poll about Americans’ views on the media. In that poll, the media’s approval rating was 19 per cent.
8. Jan. 25, 2017 — Interview with ABC’s David Muir
The claim: “No, no, you have to understand, I had a tremendous victory, one of the great victories ever. In terms of counties I think the most ever, or just about the most ever.”
In fact: Trump’s victory was not close to one of the biggest of all time. He lost the popular vote, and his Electoral College margin ranks 46th out of 58 elections. Trump did far better in terms of counties, winning more than any candidate since Ronald Reagan, but he was well short of setting the record or even “just about” tying it: Richard Nixon won more than 2,950 counties in 1972, far exceeding Trump’s 2,623.
7.Jan. 25, 2017 — Interview with ABC’s David Muir
The claim: “In terms of a total audience including television and everything else that you have we had supposedly the biggest crowd in history. The audience watching the show. And I think you would even agree to that. They say I had the biggest crowd in the history of inaugural speeches.”
In fact: “They” can mean anyone, but no expert is declaring that Trump had the biggest inauguration crowd in history. Obama’s 2009 inauguration drew far more people in person and far more television viewers. Trump’s claim relies on the people who watched the inauguration on online streams. It is possible that these people gave him a record, but it is impossible to know for sure.
6. Jan. 23, 2017 — Private meeting with Congressional leaders
The claim: Trump told Congressional leaders that “he lost the popular vote to Hillary Clinton in last November’s election because between three million and five million ‘illegals’ cast ballots, multiple sources told Fox News.”
In fact: This claim, also reported by numerous other major media outlets, simply has no basis in reality. Trump’s own lawyers said in a legal filing that “all available evidence suggests that the 2016 general election was not tainted by fraud.” The National Association of Secretaries of State — the state officials who run elections — said they “are not aware of any evidence that supports the voter fraud claims made by President Trump.”
5. Jan. 21, 2017 — Speech at Central Intelligence Agency headquarters
The claim: “So a reporter for Time magazine — and I have been on their cover, like, 14 or 15 times. I think we have the all-time record in the history of Time Magazine. Like, if Tom Brady is on the cover, it’s one time, because he won the Super Bowl or something, right? I’ve been on for 15 times this year. I don’t think that’s a record, Mike, that can ever be broken. Do you agree with that?”
In fact: Trump’s numbers are well off. He has been on the cover 11 times, Time told Politico, which is not even close to a record: Richard Nixon was on 55 covers. Even if we generously give Trump a pass here — he said he was on covers “like” 14 or 15 times, and he wasn’t sure if he had a record — he his claim about this year is flat wrong. Trump was on eight covers in 2016 and another one on the 2017 week he was speaking here — so either eight or nine total, depending on how you count, not 15.
4. Jan. 21, 2017 — Speech at Central Intelligence Agency headquarters
The repeated claim: “It was almost raining, the rain should have scared em away, but God looked down and He said, we’re not going to let it rain on your speech. In fact, when I first started, I said oh no. First line, I got hit by a couple of drops, and I said this is too bad … but the truth is that, it stopped immediately, it was amazing, and then it became really sunny.”
In fact: Neither of these claims is true. The rain did not stop immediately, and the sky then remained cloudy.
3. Jan. 21, 2017 — Speech at Central Intelligence Agency headquarters
The repeated claim: “Honestly, it looked like a million and a half people. Whatever it was it was, but it went all the way back to the Washington Monument.” Later: “…all the way back to the Washington Monument, was packed.”
In fact: The crowd, which may not have even been half a million people strong, did not come close to reaching the Washington Monument.
2. Jan. 20, 2017 — Post-inauguration Salute To Our Armed Services Ball
The claim: “Even the media said the crowd was massive … that was all the way back down to the Washington Monument.”
In fact: The major media reported that the crowd was much smaller than Barack Obama’s two inauguration crowds, though in line with the inaugurations of other Republicans. The crowd did not come close to reaching the Washington Monument.
1. Jan. 20, 2017 — Post-inauguration Liberty Ball
The claim: “I looked at the rain, which just never came. We finished the speech, went inside, it poured … it’s like God was looking down on us.”
In fact: The rain began right at the beginning of Trump’s speech. During the inauguration itself, Rev. Franklin Graham told Trump, “Mr. President, in the bible, rain is a sign of God’s blessing. And it started to rain, Mr. President, when you came to the platform.”
A big lie (German: große Lüge) is a propaganda technique. The expression was coined by Adolf Hitler, when he dictated his 1925 book Mein Kampf, about the use of a lie so “colossal” that no one would believe that someone “could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously.”
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” Joseph Goebbels
Joseph Goebbels, launched a massive campaign to convince the German people that the Jews were their enemies. Having taken over the press, they spread lies blaming Jews for all of Germany’s problems, including the loss of World War I. One outrageous lie dating back to the Middle Ages claimed that Jews engaged in the ritual killings of Christian children and used their blood in the unleavened bread eaten at Passover [source: Landau].
Donald Trump is proving himself to be a fabricator of colossal untruths and an expert liar. Here’s a partial list of false statements he has made: The United States is about to take in 250,000 Syrian refugees; African-Americans are responsible for most white homicides; and during the 9/11 attacks, “thousands and thousands” of people in an unnamed “Arab” community in New Jersey “were cheering as that building was coming down.”
Despite photographs taken at the same time from the same location, Donald Trump’s press secretary insisted that the crowd at the Trump inauguration was at least as big as the crowd at the 2008 inauguration of Barack Obama.

2009 inauguration left 2017 inauguration right
President Donald Trump believes millions of votes were cast illegally in last year’s election. White House press secretary Sean Spicer said that on Tuesday, but he wouldn’t provide any concrete evidence for the claim, which has long been debunked. “The President does believe that, I think he’s stated that before, and stated his concern of voter fraud and people voting illegally during the campaign and continues to maintain that belief based on studies and evidence people have brought to him,” Spicer said.
“Alternative facts” are the words used by Kellyann Conway when confronted by many Sunday morning news shows are all part of the big lie strategy.
Donald Trump’s win of the presidency is not in doubt. No Democrats challenged the election results. Why is he besmirching his win? Will he continue to offer his own reality on other situations?
Perhaps Trump’s focus on his election results is simply Vanity. Merriam Webster definition: the quality of people who have too much pride in their own appearance, abilities, achievements, etc. : the quality of being vain. : something (such as a belief or a way of behaving) which shows that you have too much pride in yourself, your social status, etc.
What will happen when President Donald Trump is confronted with a foreign leader who challenges his position or ideas? I fear the consequences for the United States.
Massachusetts, home to one of the nation’s wealthiest and most highly educated population, leads the nation in quality of life. Mississippi, the poorest state in the country, trails the other 49 states according to 24/7 Wall St. that reviewed three statewide social and economic measures — poverty rate, educational attainment, and life expectancy at birth — to rank each state’s living conditions. Socioeconomic outcomes vary greatly between states.
West Virginia came in at 49th place. That is no surprise. Here is a link to the rest of 24/7 Wall St. ratings. Nine of the ten with the poorest quality of life are in the South. That too is no surprise. What is a surprise is that Florida came in at number 30.
California at number 15 is the result of the high cost of housing. The median home value in California is $449,100, more than double the value of the typical home nationwide. If you can handle that then it is a great place to live as there is no snow in San Francisco, Los Angeles, and San Diego. Life expectancy is the third highest in the nation.
New York state is dominated by NYC is at 13th place. If you love the really big city that never sleeps it might be the place to live.
I would have thought that Hawaii might be in 2nd place but it’s at a mere 10th place. High incomes do not go as far in Hawaii as they would in other states. Goods and services cost about 17% more across the state than they do on average nationwide, the highest cost of living of any state.
Connecticut in second place and appears to be a great place to live.
Interestingly the people of America are not entirely in tune with the above opinions. Below is a U.S. Census map showing the change in population from July 1, 2015 to July 1, 2016. California’s low percentage growth is a consequence of being the most populated state. With 10 year growth of 11% it now has a population of over 39 million people. As there are over 324 million people in the USA, that means that 12% of the all Americans live in California.
It is not often that a White Christian of considerable fame admits that he is a racist. That is exactly what Bill O’Reilly did on his “O’Reilly Factor” program on Tuesday, December 20, 2016.
He pointed out that it is the White establishment that is in control of this nation. Essentially telling his viewing audience that minorities want to take control. O’Reilly said, “This is all about race. The left sees white privilege in America as an oppressive force that must be done away with, therefore white working class voters must be marginalized, and what better way to do that then center the voting power in the cities.”
What he did not tell his audience is that White Christians will soon be the minority race in the United States.
The change is already happening throughout the country. In California the change has already become significant. Hispanics now make up 39% of the population and Whites make up 38.4%. That White population includes Jews. Jews are at least 3% of the population. That leaves the White Christians at 35.4%.
“The left wants power taken away from the white establishment and they want a profound change in the way America is run,” said Bill O’Reilly.
From the Christian Science Monitor
December 21, 2016 — Bill O’Reilly doesn’t want the Electoral College – or the disproportionate power it brings rural, white voters – to disappear.
In a two-and-a-half minute introduction to the segment, the conservative Fox News anchor threw his support behind the system, insisting its survival was necessary to ensure that voters in predominantly rural states are not overrun by a growing population of minorities in city centers.
“The left sees white privilege in America as an oppressive force that must be done away with.” he told The O’Reilly Factor viewers on Tuesday. “The left wants power taken away from the white establishment. They want a profound change in the way America is run. Taking voting power away from the white precincts is the quickest way to do that.”
The segment has left liberals reeling, with many calling Mr. O’Reilly’s comments racist, saying he appears to prefer white votes holding additional influence over ballots cast by minorities. But for some, O’Reilly’s comments illuminate a larger segment of the population that fears the eroding influence of white voters in a rapidly changing America – the very group that President-elect Donald Trump rallied to win key swing states.
Those disappointed with Mr. Trump’s victory have protested the centuries-old system and called for a shift to a popular vote that would create equity among individual votes nationwide. Others have pushed back, arguing that the system put in place by the Founding Fathers in 1787 is a traditional and key element of the US democratic process.
O’Reilly is correct from a mathematical standpoint: The Electoral College does place an emphasis on votes from those in rural, and generally white, areas, allowing a vote cast in Wyoming, for example, to have 3.6 times the influence of one cast in California. But that doesn’t necessarily mean the system is working better for them, says George Edwards, a professor of political science at Texas A&M University.
Under the current system, candidates focus their attention on big swing states such as Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Florida, never taking the time to visit with voters in large swaths of rural America. That lack of access can hinder voter turnout in states as different as Wyoming and California.
“Right now, the candidates ignore rural areas,” Dr. Edwards tells The Christian Science Monitor in a phone interview. “You can’t do worse than nothing. Any change in the system can’t make them worse off than nothing.”
In O’Reilly’s view, however, a popular vote system would essentially strip states like Wyoming of their voice in the presidential election. Under today’s system, Democratic and Republican candidates alike spend time in places like Iowa and New Hampshire, not only drumming up support but also taking time to hear directly from voters about what issues are important to them.
In the segment, he argued that abolishing the electoral college would make large cities such as New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Houston more appealing campaign destinations for Democratic candidates, who may seek to win favor with minorities and urban dwellers and tip the national vote to the left while largely ignoring white voters living in “fly-over” states.
“[Liberals] well know that neutralizing the largely rural white areas in the Midwest and South will ensure liberal politicians get power and keep it,” O’Reilly said. “White working class voters must be marginalized. And what better way to do that than center the power in the cities?”
O’Reilly’s characterization that the push to abolish the Electoral College is driven by a desire to overthrow the reign of “white privilege” on the electoral process has drawn particular critisism from both ends of the political spectrum.
Juan Williams, a Fox News contributor and regular substitute host for The O’Reilly Factor, dismissed O’Reilly’s claim that race is the driving factor in the debate around the Electoral College.
“There is a racial overlay,” Mr. Williams said on the show. “But not everybody who is challenging the Electoral College is doing it because of race. Lots of people think it should be ‘one person, one vote’ no matter where you live in America. But if you’re out in the sticks now your vote is now worth more than a vote in California.”
That’s a major sticking point for proponents of the popular vote. But, in O’Reilly’s view, simply reverting to a system based on the popular vote would not just bring the weight of a single vote in California in line with a vote in Wyoming, it would also tip the entire election into the hands of Californians.
With more than 39 million residents, California is the most populous state, making up roughly 12 percent of the United States population. In the 2016 presidential election, Hillary Clinton won California by 4.3 million votes. If the same were to happen under a popuar vote system, California could in effect cancel out the votes of a whole handful of smaller states.
Bu Dr. Edwards, who wrote the book “Why the Electoral College is Bad for America,” suggested that if the popular vote were the law of the land, the campaign in California – and ostensibly the outcome – would have been very different.
As it is now, candidates take for granted that California will go blue. But there are nearly 5 million registered Republicans in California, 30 times as many as in Wyoming. If every vote was to be weighed individually, Republican and Democratic candidates alike would spend time in the state – a point Donald Trump alluded to shortly after the election.
“[Candidates] don’t run ads in California. They don’t invest in the ground game in California,” Edwards says. “But they would. They would take their case to people everywhere because all those votes count.”

Aleppo Syria December 14, 2016
The US ambassador to the UN, Samantha Power, unleashed a scathing attack on the Syrian government and its allies on the humanitarian crisis unfolding in Aleppo.
Sorry, Young People: You Probably Won’t Make as Much Your Parents Did
As wages stagnate in the middle class, it becomes hard to reverse this trend
From a report in the Wall Street Journal dated December 8, 2016. Barely half of 30-year-olds earn more than their parents did at a similar age, a research team found, an enormous decline from the early 1970s when the incomes of nearly all offspring outpaced their parents. Even rapid economic growth won’t do much to reverse the trend.
Wage stagnation has taken heavy toll since 1970s
“My parents thought that one thing about America is that their kids could do better than they were able to do,” said Raj Chetty, a prominent Stanford University economist who emigrated from India at age 9 and is part of the research team. “That was important in my parents’ decision to come here.”
What’s more, even if President-elect Donald Trump fulfills his promises of rapid economic growth, the trend won’t be reversed significantly. Even if income levels grew 3.8%, the percentage of 30-year-olds who out-earn their parents would bump up to just 62%, the Wall Street Journal reports.
The study was conducted by economists and sociologists at Stanford, Harvard and the University of California. They used tax and census data to compare the earnings of 30-year-olds starting in 1970 to that of their parents.
What the report does not do is explain why wages are stagnant. I will give you my take on this horrible reality. I did earn more than my parents but only because of inflation.
When I married in 1969 my salary was $10,000 per year. According to the United States bureau of Labor Statistics your income today, based upon the CPI Inflation Calculator, that salary equates to $65,866. My father never earned that inflation adjusted salary.
There have been many reasons for the stagnant salaries. Three come to mind almost immediately.
First management earned ten to twenty times the average income of most employees in the earlier parts of the 20th century. Today management earns 200 to 300 times the average income of most employees.
Second many jobs have been outsourced other countries. That has resulted in more potential employees seeking the remaining jobs. Thus with more people looking for work employers can push down the pay they have to offer.
Third, many jobs have been automated thanks to artificial intelligence (AI), and computerization. Have you seen the inside of an auto manufacturing facility? Automation has eliminated many jobs from welding to painting. Warehouses are now so automated that less material handlers are needed. Office workers, I am one of them, now have computers that perform many of the manually performed functions that were done using typewriters and spreadsheets. That too reduced manpower needs. Less manpower translates to an oversupply of workers and that translates to lower pay. It is all about supply and demand.
It is unlikely that any government of any political party will change this trend. I hope I am wrong.
Caveat emptor is a Latin term that means “let the buyer beware.”
I was in a J.C. Penny store just few days ago buying two shirts and pair of pajamas. The items were all on counters that informed me they were on sale. When I took the items to the check-out counter I was given another 5% discount. That of course made the purchase an even better deal. There were sale signs everywhere. Almost everything in that store seemed to be on sale.
A strategic mistake made in 2011 at JC Penney, regarding its pricing strategy –replacement of sales through coupons with everyday low prices. The Ron Johnson plan was implemented when he took the helm of the company, modeling the company’s stores after those of Apple. Sales declined disastrously during his tenure. People like to buy things that are “on sale.”
Here in metropolitan Los Angeles there are at least 20 Macy’s department stores. Advertising is almost daily in the newspapers. There is always a sale. 30% off, 40% off, 50% off along with One Day Sales are part of the usual pitch. I have never believed any of the advertising. My wife and daughter do believe the advertising. They are probably part of the larger group than doubters like me.
Los Angeles City Attorney Mike Feuer apparently agreed with my suspicions. Feuer’s office has filed lawsuits against four big retailers for deceptive advertising that allegedly misled shoppers into believing that thousands of products were on sale at a hefty discount.
The attorney’s office provided examples of misleading ads by Macy’s, Sears, J.C. Penny and Kohl’s. One example is the April, 2016, Sears online ad for Kenmore washing machine with a “regular” price of $1,179.99 and a “sale” price of $999.99. However, the purported “regular” price was a false reference price. The argument is that the washer was never advertised at the regular price.
California law bans retailers from advertising a higher original price unless a product was actually available at that price within three months of the ad running. Feuer said the evidence his office collected focused on thousands of online transactions, but that he had reason to believe the practices also were underway at stores.
Should there be such a California law? After all shouldn’t the words “buyer beware” apply to the purchase of any item at any price?
From 503ME Blog
We used to have something called the fairness doctrine –