caulfield12

I guess. But Miller, Chapman and Betances are closer to elite. There's really no guarantee that Robertson, Holland or Jones will increase their value...and I have a feeling the White Sox will be outbid on Holland by a contender if he's at least 85-90% healthy. That said, there is no guarantee with Derek Holland as well, but can they get this Holland for roughly the same price?

In case you just woke up, we're getting closer to war with China/Mexico/Germany and continuing to cozy up to Russia. Oh, by the way, that little NATO deal is obsolete (AGAIN). Despite everything we've heard from his Cabinet choices on the matter. Quoted in German by Bild from a conversation held in English, Trump predicted that Britain’s exit from the EU will be a success and portrayed the EU as an instrument of German domination designed with the purpose of beating the U.S. in international trade. For that reason, Trump said, he’s fairly indifferent to whether the EU stays together, according to Bild. WHAT? It's the darned Nazis all over again, secretly planning global economic hegemony!!! The Times quoted Trump as saying he was interested in making “good deals with Russia,” floating the idea of lifting sanctions that were imposed as the U.S. has sought to punish the Kremlin for its annexation of Crimea in 2014 and military support of the Syrian government. “They have sanctions on Russia -- let’s see if we can make some good deals with Russia,’’ Trump said, according to the Times. “For one thing, I think nuclear weapons should be way down and reduced very substantially, that’s part of it.’’ (Great, didn't he just wipe out the entire department and leave it without a chair/director for the first time in modern history?) https://www.yahoo.com/news/m/5f3214a9-0b49-...ny-have-it.html https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles...&yptr=yahoo

This is a pretty logical summary of the problem, in one long paragraph. Avatar Thomas 15 hours ago WrongFreedomHawk. Your assertion that the government caused the escalation of college tuition and the fees charged by physicians i simply not true. College tuition has increased, because universities and colleges are treated as a business, there to make money, and the government has systematically reduced its contribution to school aide, grants, and scholarships, resulting in more and more students having to rely on high interest loans to pay their college tuition, which continues to escalate faster than inflation. The single most important factor in the rise of physicians fees, was the eventually acceptance of assignments of benefits and third party payments by doctor's offices back in the 1960's and 1970's. Prior to this period, patient's had insurance, provided by employers, but few if any doctors offices accepted the insurance. The patient would pay the doctor his established officer fee, and the doctor's office might help the patient complete the insurance forms, so that the patient could get reimbursed by the insurance company for the payment to the doctor. However, in the 1960's and 70's there were many medical and professional lecture series dedicated to teaching doctors how to bill insurance companies for their fees, and the advantages of doing so, in expanding the patient pool seeking medical care. Many doctor's offices began accepting insurance assignment of benefits permitting them to bill the insurance company directly for their services provided insured patients, sparing the patient from having to pay for the medical services. This systems created a disconnect between the patient and the fees charged by the providers, allowing doctor's offices to greatly increase their fees, because the patient's were no longer paying. Government had no pony in this race. The patients did not seem to care or concern themselves with the cost of the care they were receiving, that was now solely the responsibility of the insurance companies. The doctors, realizing the discontent, raised their fees dramatically over a number of years, and reaped huge economic rewards, while insurance carriers were expected to pay for any and all services billed regardless of their efficacy or patient outcome. I can recall a time when colleagues of mine, being newly trained in arthroscopic surgery began charging insurance carriers $15,000.00 for what was in effect a 20-25 minute minimally invasive procedure and would schedule 15-20 of these surgeries per day. You do the math. These surgeons were making $200,000.00-$300,000.00 per day. Hospitals loved these high volume surgeons, because they were a cash cow generating huge revenues for the hospitals. Almost like printing money. Medicare, Medicaid, and other government programs have actually had a very negative effect on doctor's fees and income. Medicare pays only a fraction of a doctor's usual and customary fees. Medicaid pays fees at such an artificially low level, that few doctors will accept medicaid patients, and those that do may feel compelled to commit insurance fraud, as a rationalized justification of the mistreatment and underpayment of fees by the government. Third party insurance carriers attempt to use the extremely low fees paid by Medicare to negotiate down doctor's usual and customary fees. Note: I have lived through and had to adapt to the changes in our healthcare delivery system, the multitude of changes of healthcare reimbursement, and I own 4 healthcare companies, and a medical billing company. SO, BASICALLY, you've got the doctors/hospitals, insurance companies and drug companies all fighting for a diminishing piece of the pie. Who's going to be willing to sacrifice any of their profits, and WHY? http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/15/politics/ran...ment/index.html Rand Paul presents his plan. On Sunday, Paul gave a preview of his and argued that in requiring insurers to offer more robust plans, Obamacare drove up prices and pushed people out of the market. 1) "One of the key reforms that we will do is, we're going to legalize the sale of inexpensive insurance," he said. "That means getting rid of the Obamacare mandates on what you can buy. We are going to help people save through health savings accounts, as well as a tax credit." Those less expensive options, which were prevalent on the market before the 2010 reform was signed into law, would offer less robust care but also, as supporters argue, be more neatly tailored to what consumers view to be their specific needs. 2) Under Paul's program, the bargaining power created by the state and federal exchanges would be replaced with a provision that allows individuals and associations like small businesses to create their own markets. "There's no reason why (a business owner) with four employees shouldn't be able to join with hundreds and hundreds of other businesses that are small to become a large entity to get leverage to bring your prices down," Paul told Tapper. He added that those negotiations with insurance companies could also be used to guarantee the availability of policies that "can't cancel you and guarantees the issue of the insurance even if you get sick." 3) Paul's plan did not directly address the future of states that signed on for expanded Medicaid offered as part of Obamacare. Kentucky, which had a Democratic governor when the law went into effect, was among those to accept the funds. The majority of the more than 400,000 Kentuckians insured under the law were brought into the fold by Medicaid expansion. "That's the big question," Paul said of their fate. "And I don't think that's going to be in the replacement aspect." The future of Medicaid expansion would then be decided during the repeal process, which will run through a budget reconciliation vote -- one that requires only a simple majority for passage. "What we have to decide is what can be kept and what can't be kept," Paul said, suggesting that the states should raise taxes if they want to maintain their current expenditure levels. So that's two reasonable enough ideas, although not sure why it took since 1994...of course, you have to deal with the pre-existing conditions (addressed in point 2, although not comprehensively, it's a bit vague, as insurance companies won't voluntarily cover the most expensive pre-existing conditions) AND under 25/26 year olds staying on the insurance plans of their parents as well as who continues to pay for the CHIP plan/Medicaid (states? Federal government? higher taxes on individual families?) Of course, independent auditors/CBO are going to have to look at these Medical/Health Savings Accounts, vouchers and tax credits and score how much money it's actually going to cost compared to the current system...

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/valeant-...-153344072.html Syprine is considered the gold standard for treating Wilson’s (Disease), in part because it has relatively few side effects. But from 2011 to 2015, as Valeant hiked the price of Syprine from less than $1000 for 100 capsules to $21,266.80 for the same 100 capsules, according to documents Valeant provided the government, the drug came to have an inordinate impact on the company’s profits—and far more importantly, on the lives of those who suffer from Wilson’s disease. Syprine was featured prominently in the report about price gouging that was released last month by the Senate Special Committee on Aging. Syprine drug price increases. Source: US Senate — Special Committee on Aging All the negative press doesn’t appear to have done much to change Valeant’s tactics. One patient just received her three-month supply of Syprine at a total cost of $72,338.58, or almost $300,000 a year. The Senate Committee on Aging says that current Valeant CEO Joseph Papa told them that the company had not reduced the price of Syprine and didn’t plan to do so. (Valeant argued to me that it effectively has reduced the price of Syprine by creating patient assistance programs under which commercially insured patients will pay no more than $25 per month for their prescription, and those without insurance whose household income is below 500% of the federal poverty level will get free medication. That, of course, still leaves the insurance system, i.e. all of us, paying for Valeant’s profiteering.) In recent years, the Federal Trade Commission has been increasingly aggressive about using antitrust laws to challenge deals between drug companies that may keep a lower-priced drug off the market. In 2013, the Supreme Court ruled, over howls of protest from drug companies, that these deals are subject to antitrust scrutiny. “These business arrangements sometimes serve as a fig leaf to disguise harms to the market and price increases,” says Michael Carrier, an expert on antitrust law at Rutgers Law. But not all such deals are unlawful. The not-so-benign view is that Valeant gave Kadmon 10% of Syprine’s gross profits so that Kadmon wouldn’t undercut Valeant’s pricing by launching its own competing drug. After all, as one lawyer says, “Kadmon isn’t Pfizer,” meaning that a tiny company that was hemorrhaging money and didn’t have a massive sales force doesn’t seem like a choice partner. “If I were still at the FTC, I would investigate,” says a former FTC lawyer. Good luck, Trumpicans!

http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/15/politics/tru...care/index.html Trump promises "INSURANCE FOR ALL" Don't see how this can possibly go wrong. Republicans have long slammed Obamacare, saying its high premiums and deductibles leave enrollees feeling like the don't have insurance. They have vowed to lower the cost, primarily by lifting Obamacare's insurance regulations that require carriers to provide comprehensive benefits. Ryan and Price have unveiled frameworks for replacement plans that rely on tax credits based on enrollees' age, not income. However, health policy experts have said those credits will have to be generous in order to make coverage affordable. And that could run afoul of Republicans' promise to lower federal spending on health care. while also vowing to force drug companies to negotiate directly with the government on prices in Medicare and Medicaid. Trump said he will target pharmaceutical companies over drug prices. “They’re politically protected, but not anymore,” he said of pharmaceutical companies. In general, congressional GOP plans to replace Obamacare have tended to try to constrain costs by reducing government requirements, such as the medical services that must be provided under health plans sold through the law’s marketplaces and through states’ Medicaid programs. House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) and other Republicans have been talking lately about providing “universal access” to health insurance, instead of universal insurance coverage. “The Congress can’t get cold feet because the people will not let that happen,” Trump said during the interview with The Post. Trump said his plan for replacing most aspects of Obama’s health-care law is all but finished. Although he was coy about its details — “lower numbers, much lower deductibles” — he said he is ready to unveil it alongside Ryan and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). “It’s very much formulated down to the final strokes. We haven’t put it in quite yet but we’re going to be doing it soon.” “We’re going to have insurance for everybody,” Trump said. “There was a philosophy in some circles that if you can’t pay for it, you don’t get it. That’s not going to happen with us.” People covered under the law “can expect to have great health care. It will be in a much simplified form. Much less expensive and much better.” Trump did not say how his program overlaps with the comprehensive plan authored by House Republicans. Earlier this year, Price suggested that a Trump presidency would advance the House GOP’s health-care agenda. When asked in the interview whether he intends to cut benefits for Medicare as part of his plan, Trump said “no,” a position that was reiterated Sunday on ABC by Reince Priebus, Trump’s incoming chief of staff. Moving ahead, Trump said that lowering drug prices is central to reducing health-care costs nationally — and that he will make it a priority as he uses his bully pulpit to shape policy. When asked how exactly he would force drug manufacturers to comply, Trump said that part of his approach would be public pressure “just like on the airplane,” a nod to his tweets about Lockheed Martin’s F-35 fighter jet, which Trump said was too costly. Trump waved away the suggestion that such activity could lead to market volatility on Wall Street. “Stock drops and America goes up,” he said. “I don’t care. I want to do it right or not at all.” He added that drug companies “should produce” more products in the United States. The question of whether the government should start negotiating how much it pays drugmakers for older Americans on Medicare has long been a partisan dispute, ever since the 2003 law that created Medicare drug benefits prohibited such negotiations. Trump’s goal is uncertain, however, with respect to Medicaid, the insurance for low-income Americans run jointly by the federal government and states. Under what is known as a Medicaid “best price” rule, pharmaceutical companies already are required to sell drugs to Medicaid as the lowest price they negotiate with any other buyer. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/tru...m=.487eeaecbdcd

QUOTE (jasonxctf @ Jan 15, 2017 -> 11:02 PM) He did run for office a long time ago. I just like the fact that he "appears" to be a compassionate businessman. Seems wise and has good business values. Would love to see him run so we could see the non-scripted part and learn more about him. Also think he'd have the $ to take on Rauner. I suspect he's similar to me... a pro-business Democrat. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Lemonis Sounds like a more low-key Mark Cuban, without all the self-promotion (although being on two t.v. shows will certainly raise his profile). Went to Marquette, graduated in 1995, ran for office in Florida and then settled back down in the Midwest. If you've got a Middle Eastern businessman who can work well with NASCAR, that's SOMETHING in and of itself.

QUOTE (soxfan2014 @ Jan 11, 2017 -> 09:57 AM) Greg Holland wants 2 years with an opt out. Seriously, Sox should be all over this guy. Let him rebuild value and deal him off in July. The problem with that is it's hard to market Robertson/Jones/Holland simultaneously as closers. Seems that one needs to be moved (Robertson or Jones) to clear the way...since presumably Burdi will be the man beginning in 2018, unless Nate Jones is somehow still around and they want Burdi to break into the majors as a set-up guy first. Not sure about the wisdom of doing that, since he's closed his entire collegiate career. Addison Reed basically took over the closer's spot as a rookie, as well. Santos had to earn his way there, but his background was different, as he started out as a first round draft pick SS with the DBacks.

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/trump-th...6--finance.html Trump at war with BMW now. Would love to hear the fiscal conservatives explain how this type of approach is good for consumers as well as producers...? In a true free market economy, supply and demand should be able to meet at the equilibrium level without any government interference. Is Trump saying that he should be able to force BMW to located its factories in the US, and expect them to maintain the same exact prices for their automobiles? Is it Germany's fault that MOST consumers in both countries would, all things considered, prefer the quality of BMW/Audi/Mercedes/VW/Porsche despite the higher price tags...? Would also love to see Ayn Rand's take on all this, if she was still alive. Captain America 22 hours ago Trump is an IDIOT who knows nothing of business and economics. If US auto makers want to work for $3 / hour like Mexicans do then let them make cars. But US families should not have to pay thousands more for a car through tariffs or increased prices in order to subsidize non-competitive workers and industries. Nobody subsidized me when my paper mill shut down and the industry moved to Asia. Trump is not only a fascist but a socialist. You cannot say that you are for business and then pass socialistic or communist laws. It is socialism that does these things. Get rid of him fast before he destroys the country. Trump has basically declared an economic and racial war on a friendly, developing neighbor country (Mexico) with his auto and wall talk buffoonery. He is trying to take away the economic advances this poor neighbor had made in the last few years. Despicable!! I guess he would rather see them lose their $3/hour auto jobs and go back to growing pot and making meth and heroine which there is no way he can effectively keep out of the USA.

QUOTE (jasonxctf @ Jan 15, 2017 -> 08:59 PM) Marcus Lemonis for Governor of Illinois He's originally from Beirut? What's his story, if you could explain what you like about him in one paragraph or less...?

Balta's right...you're wiping out roughly 15-20% of the voters (nationally), and at least half of them were more pro-Trump than pro-Republican.

We plead with Donald Trump through Twitter to challenge him to use his "deal making" skills to extract the most value from another MLB owner who is one of his political enemies, lol? I think that should be in green. But maybe not...? For the sake of the fanbase and "rebuild" strategy, it would be nice to go into Sox Fest with EVERYONE on the same page, no Q questions overhanging the team (and it's going to be bad enough for roughly ten members of the 25 man roster to be facing those same reporters the first half of the season) and everyone behind the vision the team is outlining. Without that Q trade (and with Frazier/Abreu/Cabrera/Robertson still around), there will continue to be some doubts about a full and complete commitment to tearing things up 100%.

Moving Rodon now makes ZERO sense unless the offers are more for him than Q (and the odds of that are what?)...but he's one really solid season away from his value skyrocketing. Obviously, he could go town with TJS as well, but the only reason this even gets mentioned at all is because of Boras and the fact we know that Carlos is incredibly UNLIKELY to sign an extension into his FA years.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 15, 2017 -> 08:33 PM) Pence isn't that old, he isn't even 60 yet. Perception. Because of his views, he really feels like someone from Trump's "Make America Great Again" 1950's sitcom world. You could see him serving in the Eisenhower Administration or playing the father figure on Leave It To Beaver. He's not the type of Republican who can win a national race with the changing demographics working against him. He's certainly not going to attract the independent and moderate voters at all.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 15, 2017 -> 08:23 PM) You realize how few Republicans you just listed? How many Republicans can afford to have the outright white supremacists turn against them in their next election? And it works the other way for Dems in more moderate/conservative states, or ones in states with a particular industry (like pharmaceuticals) that needs to protected. See the recent drug importation vote, you'll never get Washington State or New Jersey Senators to go against their own industries, despite what's "right" for the majority of the country. The problem here is that "all politics is local" has now become "all local politics is national" thanks to Twitter/social media. At any rate, for the five or six GOP Senators we can list, you might have 10-15 Dems who are back on their heels and the fact that there are so many more Dem seats under fire in 2018 compared to this past election. OTOH, if Trump's presidency starts out as a disaster, the DEMS have a huge opening to exploit public outcry over health care, Social Security cuts, immigration, the environment, education, 1% vs. 99%, etc...they just have to figure out how to use Obama's mailing list/database infrastructure and obviously new "non-Clinton" leadership must emerge. Whether it's Schumer, Warren, Sanders, Ellison, Barbara Lee...the old guard of Pelosi/Reid needs to be pushed out the door. And the more that I think about it, the more likely someone INSIDE the Trump administration like Mattis becomes a hero of the left and takes the opportunity to run against Trump. Whenever there's a constitutional crisis, it feels like Americans trust former military leaders to get them through it, moreso than career politicians.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Jan 15, 2017 -> 08:15 PM) I think he resigns or the corruption becomes to much for the Rands, Rubios and Grahams Ted Cruz will be interesting to watch to, as he dances from "supporter" to "antagonist" with the political winds. Really, all those guys like Rubio, Kasich and Ted Cruz each find themselves in quite uncomfortable positions at the moment, but it's up to them to figure the way out of the wilderness. Basically, Trump replaced (or outmaneuvered) the Kasich-friendly head of the Ohio GOP out of spite, so it's a weird situation in terms of Trump and Kasich both competing for control of the state. Plus, we know Trump won't let a good grudge die quietly. If Ryan can successfully "replace" ObamaCare and sell it effectively to the American people, then he becomes the heir-apparent as Pence is too old and out of touch to most (well, not to mention his extreme social positions).

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 15, 2017 -> 07:50 PM) The best statement of how good of a politician that Bill Clinton was is that Hillary Clinton almost became President simply because she was married to the guy. Until Donald Trump showed up on the scene he was easily the best con artist I have ever seen operate. I barely remember Nixon (more Ford), but he has to rank right up there....although he did accomplish more positive results than Dems typically would like to give him credit for because Watergate tends to overshadow everything else looking back retrospectively. John Edwards also belongs in this conversation somewhere...except he wasn't nearly as good at playing "populist crusader" act while earning millions of dollars as a lawyer and cheating on his wife at the same time. It was inauthentic for Gore to use that approach as well. Actually, the last Dem to pull it off pretty effectively was Robert F. Kennedy in 1968.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 15, 2017 -> 07:52 PM) I wonder how many people stayed home because of the media narrative over the last few weeks that Trump had no chance of winning? The argument is that Trump's "on the fence"/independent supporters were energized the final 10-11 days by the Comey letter and the tide shifted (Clinton had been ahead for most of that time by 3-5% in national polling). Conversely, that it was the final nail in the coffin for young (especially Sanders supporters) and African-American voters who had been previously considering voting for Hillary, depressing votes on the other side. It was something like a 2 or 3X/1 margin for those late-deciders breaking for Trump, just off the top of my head. But it would be interesting to interview all those who didn't vote and see how many would have voted for Clinton (if forced to choose), and how many GOP/independent voters were so turned off by the Access Hollywood/Billy Bush stuff they just gave up on the election altogether at that point..

Since we almost NEVER have polls here at Filibuster. (And there's no way to fit ALL the potential names onto one poll, so I added all the following names just for discussion purposes.) Couldn't include Bono since he's not American, he's a big name that came to mind right away. Plus, it seems like it doesn't matter if a candidate has political experience/expertise, it's almost seen as a negative in some ways. At least it was the case with Trump. In all likelihood, they're be a tacking back in the other direction, and Americans will decide experience/policy expertise is actually necessary. It's ONE of the reasons Marco Rubio was discounted, because of the similarities to Obama in 2008, fwiw. Angelina Jolie? Kevin Spacey, haha? One of the Baldwins (but definitely not Stephen)? Geena Davis (Mensa)? Jodie Foster? Leonardo DiCaprio? Then there's the billionaire celebs: Bill Gates Mark Cuban Howard Schultz (just stepped down as CEO of Starbucks, a lot of his ideas are quite sensible) Michael Bloomberg Jesse Ventura (just for Greg775) John Elway (GOP) Howard Stern Tim McGraw (Dem) Amazon.com CEO Jeff Bezos (no hair works against him, haha) Mark Zuckerberg Ellen Degeneres Ivanka Trump Meryl Streep (haha) Jennifer Lawrence Morgan Freeman (because he always plays the president, and the voice!) Stephen Colbert Jon Stewart Chuck Norris (GOP) Clint Eastwood (GOP, too old now) Robert Downey, Jr. Bill Nye the Science Guy Christopher Walken (now that would be entertaining) Michael Moore Bill Murray Judge Judy (I would never vote for her in a million years, she's evil!) Tom Selleck Mark Harmon Tina Fey Denzel Washington Kevin Hart Snoop Dogg Eminem Steve Harvey (new advisor to Trump and Dr. Ben Carson, apparently) Sandra Bullock James Woods (GOP) Gary Busey or Nick Nolte (just for entertainment's sake) James Earl Jones (the voice!) Tom Brady/Belichick/Nick Saban/Matt Rodgers Bill Maher Mark Wahlberg Jimmy Kimmel or Jimmy Fallon

http://www.ajc.com/news/state--regional-go...pbzo953flxx5mO/ The entire city of Atlanta joins the list. That last line from Trump signals that he's about to reactivate the passion missing from all those African-American voters who sat at home instead of voting in November. Between that and getting ripped to shreds by CIA Director John Brennan for all the world to see...it's going to be a VERY long week.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trumps-attack-on...-171644389.html Well, Trump has pissed off the entire city of Atlanta, the Congressional Black Caucus and BIGLY increased sales of all John Lewis' published works...ironically, much more than he has helped LL Bean for/by unethically touting them.

QUOTE (Alpha Dog @ Jan 15, 2017 -> 08:07 AM) So I read that the Clinton Global Initiative is closing up shop since donation have dried up. I guess with no influence to peddle, no money coming in. But I thought they did such great work! Why would donors abandon them? http://observer.com/2017/01/the-clinton-fo...iative/?ref=yfp Clinton was the greatest politician of his time, and the most flawed in terms of understanding his own weaknesses...perhaps, ultimately knowing that he could easily manipulate people to forgive him is what led to his ultimate undoing. But brilliant political mind and grasp of policy minutiae, the complete anti-Trump (except in one key way, that both were a boon for reporters/ratings/coverage). Ironically, he knew all along how important states like PA, Michigan and Wisconsin would be but was ignored by his wife's campaign until it was too late. All that because of the South Carolina primary in 2008 against Obama. Sad that even those closest advisors like Band and Huma Abedin ended up as collateral damage along the way. Luckily for Greg there is no Chelsea for president groundswell to worry about anymore.

A lot of projections have Asche as the DH, Avi in RF and Tilson in CF. Lawrie over Saladino at 2B, presumably to trade him if he makes it into the regular season. Fwiw. It seems that Asche, Liriano, Avi and Davidson are fighting it out for two and potentially three spots depending on whether they want to go with Leury Garcia as the 25th man. Asche's 689 ops in the NL East...guess we'll find out how he fares against the AL soon enough.

Cory Booker, 12 other Dems put local interests over national ones...could have taken a step towards potentially lowering prescription drug prices significantly. http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/201...rats?yptr=yahoo http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politic...-newstopstories Full list of all the senators who went against 72% national approval for allowing importation to lower prices/increase competition.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/astros-pitche...-053419644.html Astros pitcher Collin McHugh http://www.chron.com/sports/astros/article...on-10858488.php Article on McHugh and Bregman Mad Dog Mattis could quickly become a media star in his own right if he doesn't get fired first for crossing his new boss. Rep. John Lewis Richard Burr-NC Rubio McCain Paul Graham Collins

https://www.yahoo.com/news/some-democratic-...-225356015.html At least 13 Democratic lawmakers (and growing) skipping the inauguration. Surely Trump will have Twitter threats for all of them. Should keep him busy this week. https://www.yahoo.com/news/cowardly-donald-...-170120332.html Backlash over Trump attacks on Lewis on MLK weekend https://mobile.twitter.com/BillKristol/stat...src=twsrc%5Etfw When Bill Kristol sides against you...