Creatively Expressed Unexpressed Anxiety ~ IDCMEDIA, TIDCS… REAL. RAW. RIGHT NOW… IDECLAIR IT!~
Good Saturday, 21 September, 2013. Thank you as always for listening to, participating in, & ENGAGING w/ IDCMEDIA, TIDCS…
Welcome to Saturday Brunch IDECLAIR ~
As we do a programming pivot to Saturdays, I thank you guys for staying with me, getting the program, & bringing your REAL RAW RIGHT NOW…
Today, we listen to The Weekly Address, and the powerful, and commonsense remarks from President Obama’s speech yesterday, in Liberty, MO. See link below:
Second hour, we get into the horror of gun violence in America. I submit my take on the core problem, and what should be done about it.
* * *
FOCUS on POLICY because POLICY is FOCUSED on… YOU. IDECLAIR IT!~
Here’s The Weekly:
“Weekly Address: Congress Must Act Now to Pass a Budget and Raise the Debt Ceiling”
Sep 21, 2013
“In his weekly address, President Obama says the economy is making progress five years after the worst recession since the Great Depression, but to avoid another crisis, Congress must meet two deadlines in the coming weeks: pass a budget by the end of the month to keep the government open, and raise the debt ceiling so America can pay its bills. Congress should vote to do these now, so that we can keep creating new jobs and expanding opportunity for the middle class.”
“WEEKLY ADDRESS: Congress Must Act Now to Pass a Budget and Raise the Debt Ceiling”
Remarks of President Barack Obama
The White House
September 21, 2013
“Hi, everybody. It was five years ago this week that a financial crisis on Wall Street spread to Main Street, and very nearly turned a recession into a depression.
In a matter of months, millions of Americans were robbed of their jobs, their homes, their savings – after a decade in which they’d already been working harder and harder to just get by.
It was a crisis from which we’re still trying to recover. But thanks to the grit and determination of the American people, we are steadily recovering.
Over the past three and a half years, our businesses have created seven and a half million new jobs. Our housing market is healing. We’ve become less dependent on foreign oil. Health care costs are growing at the slowest rate in 50 years. And in just over a week, millions of Americans without health care will be able to get covered for less than $100 a month.
So our economy is gaining traction. And we’re finally tackling threats to middle-class prosperity that Washington neglected for far too long. But as any middle-class family listening right now knows, we’ve got a long way to go to get to where we need to be. And after five years spent digging out of crisis, the last thing we need is for Washington to manufacture another.
But that’s what will happen in the next few weeks if Congress doesn’t meet two deadlines.
First: the most basic Constitutional duty Congress has is passing a budget. But if it doesn’t pass one before September 30th – a week from Monday – the government will shut down. And so will many services the American people expect. Military personnel, including those deployed overseas, won’t get their paychecks on time. Federal loans for rural communities, small business owners, and new home buyers will be frozen. Critical research into life-saving discoveries and renewable energy will be immediately halted. All of this will be prevented if Congress just passes a budget.
Second: Congress must authorize the Treasury to pay America’s bills. This is done with a simple, usually routine vote to raise what’s called the debt ceiling. Since the 1950s, Congress has always passed it, and every President has signed it – Democrats and Republicans, including President Reagan. And if this Congress doesn’t do it within the next few weeks, the United States will default on its obligations and put our entire economy at risk.
This is important: raising the debt ceiling is not the same as approving more spending. It lets us pay for what Congress already spent. It doesn’t cost a dime, or add a penny to our deficit. In fact, right now, our deficits are already falling at the fastest rate since the end of World War II. And by the end of this year, we’ll have cut our deficits by more than half since I took office.
But reducing our deficits and debt isn’t even what the current standoff in Congress is about.
Now, Democrats and some reasonable Republicans are willing to raise the debt ceiling and pass a sensible budget – one that cuts spending on what we don’t need so we can invest in what we do. And I want to work with those Democrats and Republicans on a better bargain for the middle class.
But there’s also a faction on the far right of the Republican party who’ve convinced their leadership to threaten a government shutdown if they can’t shut off the Affordable Care Act. Some are actually willing to plunge America into default if they can’t defund the Affordable Care Act.
Think about that. They’d actually plunge this country back into recession – all to deny the basic security of health care to millions of Americans.
Well, that’s not happening. And they know it’s not happening.
The United States of America is not a deadbeat nation. We are a compassionate nation. We are the world’s bedrock investment. And doing anything to threaten that is the height of irresponsibility. That’s why I will not negotiate over the full faith and credit of the United States. I will not allow anyone to harm this country’s reputation, or threaten to inflict economic pain on millions of our own people, just to make an ideological point.
So, we are running out of time to fix this. But we could fix it tomorrow. Both houses of Congress can take a simple vote to pay our bills on time, then work together to pass a budget on time.
Then we can declare an end to governing by crisis and govern responsibly, by putting our focus back where it should always be – on creating new jobs, growing our economy, and expanding opportunity not just for ourselves, but for future generations.
* * *
GUN VIOLENCE IN AMERICA.
Vile. Horrific. Continuous, insane, grotesque, self sabotaging, genocidal gun violence in America… What is with the freak fascination and fetish with instruments of death… guns?
What would bring responsibility, order, and structure to the apparent free flowing dealing, and distribution of hundreds of millions of varying firearm instruments of death? FIREARM INDUSTRY LIABILITY FROM CARNAGE CREATED BY IRRESPONSIBLE USAGE OF THEIR PRODUCTS. PERIOD.
No one, or no industry should be above the law. However, this unprecedented law literally immunizes manufacturers, dealers, and distributors from liability.
Where is traditional media on this core component to gun violence in America?
Read it for yourself. Since GOP RW Regressives are so into repeal, REPEAL THIS:
Where is MUCH NEEDED ACCOUNTABILITY, and RESPONSIBILITY FOR CARNAGE CREATED BY FIREARMS INDUSTRY?
“Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (Enrolled Bill [Final as Passed Both House and Senate]” S.397
“SEC. 3. PROHIBITION ON BRINGING OF QUALIFIED CIVIL LIABILITY ACTIONS IN FEDERAL OR STATE COURT.”
- “(a) In General- A qualified civil liability action may not be brought in any Federal or State court.
- (b) Dismissal of Pending Actions- A qualified civil liability action that is pending on the date of enactment of this Act shall be immediately dismissed by the court in which the action was brought or is currently pending.
SEC. 4. DEFINITIONS.
- In this Act:
- (1) ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS- The term `engaged in the business’ has the meaning given that term in section 921(a)(21) of title 18, United States Code, and, as applied to a seller of ammunition, means a person who devotes time, attention, and labor to the sale of ammunition as a regular course of trade or business with the principal objective of livelihood and profit through the sale or distribution of ammunition.
- (2) MANUFACTURER- The term `manufacturer’ means, with respect to a qualified product, a person who is engaged in the business of manufacturing the product in interstate or foreign commerce and who is licensed to engage in business as such a manufacturer under chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code.
- (3) PERSON- The term `person’ means any individual, corporation, company, association, firm, partnership, society, joint stock company, or any other entity, including any governmental entity.
- (4) QUALIFIED PRODUCT- The term `qualified product’ means a firearm (as defined in subparagraph (A) or (B) of section 921(a)(3) of title 18, United States Code), including any antique firearm (as defined in section 921(a)(16) of such title), or ammunition (as defined in section 921(a)(17)(A) of such title), or a component part of a firearm or ammunition, that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.
- (5) QUALIFIED CIVIL LIABILITY ACTION-
- (A) IN GENERAL- The term `qualified civil liability action’ means a civil action or proceeding or an administrative proceeding brought by any person against a manufacturer or seller of a qualified product, or a trade association, for damages, punitive damages, injunctive or declaratory relief, abatement, restitution, fines, or penalties, or other relief, resulting from the criminal or unlawful misuse of a qualified product by the person or a third party, but shall not include–
- (i) an action brought against a transferor convicted under section 924(h) of title 18, United States Code, or a comparable or identical State felony law, by a party directly harmed by the conduct of which the transferee is so convicted;
- (ii) an action brought against a seller for negligent entrustment or negligence per se;
- (iii) an action in which a manufacturer or seller of a qualified product knowingly violated a State or Federal statute applicable to the sale or marketing of the product, and the violation was a proximate cause of the harm for which relief is sought, including–
- (I) any case in which the manufacturer or seller knowingly made any false entry in, or failed to make appropriate entry in, any record required to be kept under Federal or State law with respect to the qualified product, or aided, abetted, or conspired with any person in making any false or fictitious oral or written statement with respect to any fact material to the lawfulness of the sale or other disposition of a qualified product; or
- (II) any case in which the manufacturer or seller aided, abetted, or conspired with any other person to sell or otherwise dispose of a qualified product, knowing, or having reasonable cause to believe, that the actual buyer of the qualified product was prohibited from possessing or receiving a firearm or ammunition under subsection (g) or (n) of section 922 of title 18, United States Code;
- (iv) an action for breach of contract or warranty in connection with the purchase of the product;
- (v) an action for death, physical injuries or property damage resulting directly from a defect in design or manufacture of the product, when used as intended or in a reasonably foreseeable manner, except that where the discharge of the product was caused by a volitional act that constituted a criminal offense, then such act shall be considered the sole proximate cause of any resulting death, personal injuries or property damage; or
- (vi) an action or proceeding commenced by the Attorney General to enforce the provisions of chapter 44 of title 18 or chapter 53 of title 26, United States Code.
- (B) NEGLIGENT ENTRUSTMENT- As used in subparagraph (A)(ii), the term `negligent entrustment’ means the supplying of a qualified product by a seller for use by another person when the seller knows, or reasonably should know, the person to whom the product is supplied is likely to, and does, use the product in a manner involving unreasonable risk of physical injury to the person or others.
- (C) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION- The exceptions enumerated under clauses (i) through (v) of subparagraph (A) shall be construed so as not to be in conflict, and no provision of this Act shall be construed to create a public or private cause of action or remedy.
- (D) MINOR CHILD EXCEPTION- Nothing in this Act shall be construed to limit the right of a person under 17 years of age to recover damages authorized under Federal or State law in a civil action that meets 1 of the requirements under clauses (i) through (v) of subparagraph (A).
- (6) SELLER- The term `seller’ means, with respect to a qualified product–
- (A) an importer (as defined in section 921(a)(9) of title 18, United States Code) who is engaged in the business as such an importer in interstate or foreign commerce and who is licensed to engage in business as such an importer under chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code;
- (B) a dealer (as defined in section 921(a)(11) of title 18, United States Code) who is engaged in the business as such a dealer in interstate or foreign commerce and who is licensed to engage in business as such a dealer under chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code; or
- (C) a person engaged in the business of selling ammunition (as defined in section 921(a)(17)(A) of title 18, United States Code) in interstate or foreign commerce at the wholesale or retail level.
- (7) STATE- The term `State’ includes each of the several States of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and any other territory or possession of the United States, and any political subdivision of any such place.
- (8) TRADE ASSOCIATION- The term `trade association’ means–
- (A) any corporation, unincorporated association, federation, business league, professional or business organization not organized or operated for profit and no part of the net earnings of which inures to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual;
- (B) that is an organization described in section 501(c)(6) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and exempt from tax under section 501(a) of such Code; and
- (C) 2 or more members of which are manufacturers or sellers of a qualified product.
- (9) UNLAWFUL MISUSE- The term `unlawful misuse’ means conduct that violates a statute, ordinance, or regulation as it relates to the use of a qualified product.
SEC. 5. CHILD SAFETY LOCKS.
- (a) SHORT TITLE- This section may be cited as the `Child Safety Lock Act of 2005′.
- (b) PURPOSES- The purposes of this section are–
- (1) to promote the safe storage and use of handguns by consumers;
- (2) to prevent unauthorized persons from gaining access to or use of a handgun, including children who may not be in possession of a handgun; and
- (3) to avoid hindering industry from supplying firearms to law abiding citizens for all lawful purposes, including hunting, self-defense, collecting, and competitive or recreational shooting.
- (c) FIREARMS SAFETY-
- (1) MANDATORY TRANSFER OF SECURE GUN STORAGE OR SAFETY DEVICE- Section 922 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting at the end the following:
- `(z) SECURE GUN STORAGE OR SAFETY DEVICE-
- `(1) IN GENERAL- Except as provided under paragraph (2), it shall be unlawful for any licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer to sell, deliver, or transfer any handgun to any person other than any person licensed under this chapter, unless the transferee is provided with a secure gun storage or safety device (as defined in section 921(a)(34)) for that handgun.
- `(2) EXCEPTIONS- Paragraph (1) shall not apply to–
- `(A)(i) the manufacture for, transfer to, or possession by, the United States, a department or agency of the United States, a State, or a department, agency, or political subdivision of a State, of a handgun; or
- `(ii) the transfer to, or possession by, a law enforcement officer employed by an entity referred to in clause (i) of a handgun for law enforcement purposes (whether on or off duty); or
- `(B) the transfer to, or possession by, a rail police officer employed by a rail carrier and certified or commissioned as a police officer under the laws of a State of a handgun for purposes of law enforcement (whether on or off duty);
- `(C) the transfer to any person of a handgun listed as a curio or relic by the Secretary pursuant to section 921(a)(13); or
- `(D) the transfer to any person of a handgun for which a secure gun storage or safety device is temporarily unavailable for the reasons described in the exceptions stated in section 923(e), if the licensed manufacturer, licensed importer, or licensed dealer delivers to the transferee within 10 calendar days from the date of the delivery of the handgun to the transferee a secure gun storage or safety device for the handgun.
- `(3) LIABILITY FOR USE-
- `(A) IN GENERAL- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a person who has lawful possession and control of a handgun, and who uses a secure gun storage or safety device with the handgun, shall be entitled to immunity from a qualified civil liability action.
- `(B) PROSPECTIVE ACTIONS- A qualified civil liability action may not be brought in any Federal or State court.
- `(C) DEFINED TERM- As used in this paragraph, the term `qualified civil liability action’–
- `(i) means a civil action brought by any person against a person described in subparagraph (A) for damages resulting from the criminal or unlawful misuse of the handgun by a third party, if–
- `(I) the handgun was accessed by another person who did not have the permission or authorization of the person having lawful possession and control of the handgun to have access to it; and
- `(II) at the time access was gained by the person not so authorized, the handgun had been made inoperable by use of a secure gun storage or safety device; and
- `(ii) shall not include an action brought against the person having lawful possession and control of the handgun for negligent entrustment or negligence per se.’.
- (2) CIVIL PENALTIES- Section 924 of title 18, United States Code, is amended–
- (A) in subsection (a)(1), by striking `or (f)’ and inserting `(f), or (p)’; and
- (B) by adding at the end the following:
- `(p) PENALTIES RELATING TO SECURE GUN STORAGE OR SAFETY DEVICE-
- `(1) IN GENERAL-
- `(A) SUSPENSION OR REVOCATION OF LICENSE; CIVIL PENALTIES- With respect to each violation of section 922(z)(1) by a licensed manufacturer, licensed importer, or licensed dealer, the Secretary may, after notice and opportunity for hearing–
- `(i) suspend for not more than 6 months, or revoke, the license issued to the licensee under this chapter that was used to conduct the firearms transfer; or
- `(ii) subject the licensee to a civil penalty in an amount equal to not more than $2,500.
- `(B) REVIEW- An action of the Secretary under this paragraph may be reviewed only as provided under section 923(f).
- `(2) ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES- The suspension or revocation of a license or the imposition of a civil penalty under paragraph (1) shall not preclude any administrative remedy that is otherwise available to the Secretary.’.
- (3) LIABILITY; EVIDENCE-
- (A) LIABILITY- Nothing in this section shall be construed to–
- (i) create a cause of action against any Federal firearms licensee or any other person for any civil liability; or
- (ii) establish any standard of care.
- (B) EVIDENCE- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, evidence regarding compliance or noncompliance with the amendments made by this section shall not be admissible as evidence in any proceeding of any court, agency, board, or other entity, except with respect to an action relating to section 922(z) of title 18, United States Code, as added by this subsection.
- (C) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION- Nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to bar a governmental action to impose a penalty under section 924(p) of title 18, United States Code, for a failure to comply with section 922(z) of that title.
- (d) EFFECTIVE DATE- This section and the amendments made by this section shall take effect 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act.
SEC. 6. ARMOR PIERCING AMMUNITION.
- (a) Unlawful Acts- Section 922(a) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by striking paragraphs (7) and (8) and inserting the following:
- `(7) for any person to manufacture or import armor piercing ammunition, unless–
- `(A) the manufacture of such ammunition is for the use of the United States, any department or agency of the United States, any State, or any department, agency, or political subdivision of a State;
- `(B) the manufacture of such ammunition is for the purpose of exportation; or
- `(C) the manufacture or importation of such ammunition is for the purpose of testing or experimentation and has been authorized by the Attorney General;
- `(8) for any manufacturer or importer to sell or deliver armor piercing ammunition, unless such sale or delivery–
- `(A) is for the use of the United States, any department or agency of the United States, any State, or any department, agency, or political subdivision of a State;
- `(B) is for the purpose of exportation; or
- `(C) is for the purpose of testing or experimentation and has been authorized by the Attorney General;’.
- (b) Penalties- Section 924(c) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
- `(5) Except to the extent that a greater minimum sentence is otherwise provided under this subsection, or by any other provision of law, any person who, during and in relation to any crime of violence or drug trafficking crime (including a crime of violence or drug trafficking crime that provides for an enhanced punishment if committed by the use of a deadly or dangerous weapon or device) for which the person may be prosecuted in a court of the United States, uses or carries armor piercing ammunition, or who, in furtherance of any such crime, possesses armor piercing ammunition, shall, in addition to the punishment provided for such crime of violence or drug trafficking crime or conviction under this section–
- `(A) be sentenced to a term of imprisonment of not less than 15 years; and
- `(B) if death results from the use of such ammunition–
- `(i) if the killing is murder (as defined in section 1111), be punished by death or sentenced to a term of imprisonment for any term of years or for life; and
- `(ii) if the killing is manslaughter (as defined in section 1112), be punished as provided in section 1112.’.
- (c) Study and Report-
- (1) STUDY- The Attorney General shall conduct a study to determine whether a uniform standard for the testing of projectiles against Body Armor is feasible.
- (2) ISSUES TO BE STUDIED- The study conducted under paragraph (1) shall include–
- (A) variations in performance that are related to the length of the barrel of the handgun or center-fire rifle from which the projectile is fired; and
- (B) the amount of powder used to propel the projectile.
- (3) REPORT- Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the Attorney General shall submit a report containing the results of the study conducted under this subsection to–
- (A) the chairman and ranking member of the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate; and
- (B) the chairman and ranking member of the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives.
Speaker of the House of Representatives.
Vice President of the United States and
President of the Senate.”
* * *
In 2004, then Senator Joe Biden warned America about the PROTECTION OF LAWFUL COMMERCE IN ARMS ACT.
“Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act”
Date: March 2, 2004
Location: Washington, DC
“PROTECTION OF LAWFUL COMMERCE IN ARMS ACT”
“Mr. BIDEN. Mr. President, I rise today to make plain my strong opposition to the bill under consideration today, S. 1805, the “Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.” Let me state at the outset, I support the rights of law-abiding citizens to own and appropriately use firearms. But this bill has nothing to do with protecting those citizens’ rights. Instead, this bill is about protecting rogue gun manufacturers that sell defective products and rogue gun dealers who turn a blind eye to suspicious sales and thefts.
The shorthand title for the bill is accurate, the Gun Industry Immunity Act. I won’t mince words, this bill gives an entire industry a free pass. In exchange for that free pass, hundreds of thousands of victims across the county will confront closed doors at the courthouse. While I recognize that the bill carves out a set of exceptions of permissible law suits, this is cold comfort. The exceptions are extremely narrow and do not provide reasonable opportunities for legitimate lawsuits to proceed. I am deeply troubled by the fact that this bill will stop pending and future civil lawsuits against the gun industry, including those filed in the wake of the DC Sniper shootings.
As the American public well knows, prior to their killing spree, John Muhammad and Lee Malvo allegedly obtained a Bushmaster rifle from a store in Tacoma, Washington, the infamous Bull’s Eye Shooter Supply Shop. This rifle was one of 238 weapons that disappeared from the store’s inventory over a three year period. More than fifty of those same “missing” firearms turned up in crime traces. Civil suits have been filed against Bull’s Eye alleging that the store was negligent by failing to keep track of its weapons, and against the gun manufacturer alleging that continuing to supply such dangerous weapons to a store that cannot maintain accurate track is also negligent conduct. But under today’s bill, these allegations do not fit the narrow exceptions of permissible suits. Legal experts David Boies and Lloyd N. Cutler, as well as the Congressional Research Service, opine that these sniper suits will be dismissed immediately if the President signs the gun industry immunity act. In real terms this means that the snipers’ victims, including Denise Johnson, widow of the Montgomery County bus driver Conrad Johnson, and the family of James “Sonny” Buchanan, who was gunned down while mowing the lawn, will have no remedies.
Another lawsuit that will be derailed if the gun industry immunity bill passes is a 1999 case against a gun dealer who repeatedly supplied a so-called “straw purchaser” with handguns, one of which killed 9-year old Nafis Jefferson in Philadelphia, PA. I was struck by what Nafis’ mother said when advised that her lawsuit may be dismissed. She stated, “Before this happened, I believed in the American dream. You work hard, you have a family, you have a good life. This-this has devastated me. I understand commerce, but there also has to be common sense.”
Under the gun industry immunity bill it is quite likely that a pending suit filed by the families of two New Jersey police officers will be dismissed. The officers’ families have sued the gun dealer who sold the gun used to shoot them, one of twelve guns the dealer sold in one transaction, in cash, in circumstances so suspicious that the dealer subsequently called to alert the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. Yet rather than having the careful consideration of the facts by judge and jury, today, Congress will decide that Mr. McGuire’s and Mr. Lemongello’s families cannot pursue any remedies in civil court.
A family in Massachusetts will also be denied a right to sue should the Gun Industry Immunity Bill pass. Twenty-six year old Danny Guzman was killed with a 9 mm Kahr Arms gun. The gun was one of a dozen taken from Kahr’s unsecured factory, some by the manufacturer’s own employee with a criminal record and history of drug abuse. The guns were taken before serial numbers had been stamped on them, making them very difficult to trace. Eventually, a young child found the gun used in Mr. Guzman’s death behind an apartment building close to the scene of the shooting. A Massachusetts court found that the suit alleges valid negligence and public nuisance claims against the gun manufacturer and it is set for trial. Yet today’s bill would deny Mr. Guzman’s family their day in court.
Some have characterized the lawsuits against the gun manufacturers and dealers as “junk” suits that are cluttering our court houses and bankrupting the industry and thus, justifying this extraordinary solution of blanket civil immunity. But our local, State and Federal judges and court personnel are no where to be found in this debate. No letters or reports document an inundation of firearm lawsuits plugging up the halls of justice. Furthermore, there is no evidence that our State and Federal courts cannot efficiently and effectively manage the pending forearm lawsuits. Indeed, the opposite is true. Look no further than a recently issued opinion by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in which the court addressed the certified question on whether state law created a duty to protect victims of handgun violence from injury caused by illegal gun trafficking. This Court wrote a careful and balanced opinion that fully addressed the issue. As a former Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, I am well aware of the complicated and deliberate process courts follow to develop tort law. I am not persuaded that Congress should tread into these waters so adeptly managed by our nation’s judges and juries.
Gun manufacturers and dealers are not above the law. The gun industry Immunity bill is a radical and unprecedented attempt to undercut common tort law, usurp the responsibilities of judges and juries and most importantly, deny worthy victims of their day in court. I urge my colleagues to vote against S. 1805, and thank the distinguished Senator from Rhode Island for his hard work fighting this bill.”
* * *
Join us next Saturday for Saturday Brunch IDECLAIR ~
11am ET live here: http://www.blogtalkradio.com/theideclairshow/
FOCUS on POLICY because POLICY is FOCUSED on… YOU.
No Matter What… Know YOUR Value! No Matter What… Know YOU Matter.
YOU Are the CEO of YOU. PERIOD.
Issues Events & Concerns In YOUR Best Interest, In Most Laps, & On Most Tables is:
IDECLAIR MEDIA, THE IDECLAIR SHOW…
REAL. RAW. RIGHT NOW…