Sat, Aug 23, 2014, 5:42 AM EDT - U.S. Markets closed


% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

AT&T, Inc. Message Board

happygambler34 39 posts  |  Last Activity: Aug 21, 2014 12:16 PM Member since: Sep 27, 2000
SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Highest Rated Expand all messages
  • Reply to

    dividend announcement

    by wnlsworld Aug 21, 2014 9:50 AM
    happygambler34 happygambler34 Aug 21, 2014 12:16 PM Flag

    They always announce dividend after BOD meeting at end of month.. Expect it 8/30 or 8/31.

  • Reply to


    by happygambler34 Jul 17, 2014 3:26 PM
    happygambler34 happygambler34 Jul 17, 2014 5:16 PM Flag

    2014 Lie of the Year

    Ba aha aha ha aha ha ha ah aha ha ha ha ha ah aha ha ha ha ha ha ah ah ah aha ha ha ha ha ah ah aha ha

    The sound lazykid hears while entertaining in an empty forest.

  • Reply to


    by happygambler34 Jul 17, 2014 3:26 PM
    happygambler34 happygambler34 Jul 17, 2014 5:12 PM Flag

    closed every single one of their stores six months ago

    So what ...

    What does that have to do with "Reviewing LOTUS travels to Arabian states", and "Moochelle"s" past and current non- travels to Arabian states....and why FLLOTUS is AWOL in Muslim states.

  • As US lawmakers grapple with ways to slash spending, many were shocked to learn authorities are spending $250 to $1,000 per day to care for each minor apprehended crossing the US border.

    More than 57,000 unaccompanied children, mostly from Central America, have been caught entering the country illegally since last October, and President Barack Obama has asked for $3.7 billion in emergency funding to address what he has called an "urgent humanitarian solution."

    "One of the figures that sticks in everybody's mind is we're paying about $250 to $1,000 per child," Senator Jeff Flake told reporters, citing figures presented at a closed-door briefing by Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson.

    "A lot of people were very troubled coming out of there."

    Federal authorities are struggling to find more cost-effective housing, medical care, counseling and legal services for the undocumented minors.

    Some $1.8 billion of Obama's emergency supplemental would be allocated to the Department of Health and Human Services to address those needs.

    The base cost per bed was $250 per day, including other services, Senator Dianne Feinstein said, without providing details.
    "It goes up to $1,000 per day if you have to contract temporarily," she added. "That's what they're trying to avoid."

    Senator Marco Rubio, who like Flake is a Republican who helped craft a comprehensive immigration reform bill that passed the Senate but has died in the House, said lawmakers "were shocked at the figures."
    "I think now we're starting to see the human costs and the economic costs of providing care for those who have entered the country illegally, and it behooves us to address this as quickly as possible."

    US officials predict some 30,000 more unaccompanied children will cross the border by the end of September, and that 145,000 will be apprehended next year.

  • Reply to


    by happygambler34 Jul 17, 2014 3:26 PM
    happygambler34 happygambler34 Jul 17, 2014 3:42 PM Flag

    ACTIONS speak louder than words.Another interesting item regarding Sharia Law. Why has Barack Hussein Obama insisted that the U.S. Attorney General hold the trials of the 911 Muslim Terrorists in Civilian Courts as Common Criminals instead of as Terrorists who attacked the United States of America? If the Muslim Terrorists are tried in Military Tribunals, convicted and sentenced to death, by LAW, Barack Hussein Obama, as President of the United States, would be required to sign their death warrants. He would not be required to sign the death warrants if they are sentenced to death by a Civilian Court. Muslim Jihadist, Army Major Hassan slaughtered non-Muslim soldiers at Ft. Hood, Texas rather than go to Afghanistan and be a part of anything that could lead to the deaths of fellow Muslims. He stated that Muslims 'could not and should not kill fellow Muslims.' Is the motive for Barack Hussein Obama's insistence on civilian trials, to make sure he doesn't have to sign the death warrants for the Muslim Terrorists? Why would he, as President of the United States, not sign the death warrants for Muslim Terrorists who attacked the United States and murdered over 3,000 U. S. Citizens on 9/11? Could it be that he is FORBIDDEN by his RELIGION to authorize the execution of Muslims? Think about that! Open your eyes, ears and mind to who the President is, how he behaves and what he is doing. Actions speak louder than teleprompter -written words!

  • happygambler34 by happygambler34 Jul 17, 2014 3:26 PM Flag

    Reviewing LOTUS travels to Arabian states

    Interesting! Sheppard Smith, Fox News.

    “If you check President Obama’s last trip over-seas, his wife left just after their visit to France . She has yet to accompany him to any Arab country. Think about it. Why is Michelle returning to the states when ‘official’ trips to foreign countries generally include the First Lady.”
    Here’s one thought on the matter.
    While in a Blockbuster renting videos I came across a video called “Obama”. There were two men standing next to me and we talked about President Obama. These guys were Arabs, so I asked them why they thought Michelle Obama headed home following the President’s recent visit to France instead of traveling on to Saudi Arabia and Turkey with her husband. They told me she could not go to Saudi Arabia , Turkey or Iraq . I said “Why not,(?) Laura Bush went to Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Dubai .” They said that Obama is a Muslim and therefore he is not allowed to bring his wife into countries that adhere to Sharia Law.
    Two points of interest here: 1) I thought it interesting that two American Arabs at Blockbuster believe that our President is a Muslim, who follows a strict Islamic creed.
    2) They also said that’s the reason he bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia . It was a signal to the Muslim world, acknowledging his religion.
    For further consideration, here is a response from Dr. Jim Murk, a Middle Eastern Scholar and expert on Islam. This is his explanation of what the Arab American’s were saying.
    “An orthodox Muslim man would never take his wife on a politically oriented trip to any nation which practices Sharia law, particularly Saudi Arabia where the Wahhabi sect is dominant. This is true and it is why Obama left Michelle in Europe . She will stay home when he visits Arab countries. He knows Muslim protocol; this includes, bowing to the Saudi King. Obama is regarded as a Muslim in the Arab world, because he was born to a Muslim father; he acknowledged his Muslim faith with George Stephanopoulus. Note that he downplays his involvement with Christianity, by not publicly joining a Christian church in D.C. And occasionally attending the chapel for services at Camp David . He also played down the fact that America is a Christian country and said, unbelievably, that it was one of the largest Muslim nations in the world, which is nonsense. He has publicly taken the side of the Palestinians in the conflict with Israel and he ignored the National Day of Prayer, something no other President has ever done. He is bad news! He conceals his true faith to the detriment of the American people.”
    — Jim Murk, Doctor of Philosophy in Middle Eastern Culture & Religion.

  • happygambler34 happygambler34 Jul 15, 2014 2:40 PM Flag

    So how could he know she was wrong

    What she was wrong about was stuffing unwanted food down throats of kids. So her so called nutrition program is accomplishing nothing other than wasting tax $$s.

  • happygambler34 happygambler34 Jul 15, 2014 2:19 PM Flag

    More Evidence U.S. Funds al-Qaeda Terrorists in Syria
    Establishment media glosses over hypocrisy of war on terror

    Earlier this year, the United States and the Gulf monarchies initiated a propaganda effort designed to sanitize the image of the mercenaries fighting to topple the Syrian government. According to The Telegraph, mercenary groups “best equipped to take on the extremists” were given millions of dollars to go up against al-Qaeda’s Islamic State of Iraq and al-Shams (ISIS), which was said to have “hijacked” the foreign effort to overthrow the regime of Bashar al-Assad.

    The British newspaper reported Jamal Maarouf, with the help of the CIA and Saudi and Qatari intelligence, created the Syrian Revolutionary Front (SRF), a collection of “moderate” fighters who reportedly launched attacks against the ISIS and its jihadist allies.

  • happygambler34 happygambler34 Jul 15, 2014 2:15 PM Flag

    He hasn't, you senile dunce.

    Relly.....It's obvious you don't get the 1st hand reports because you don't watch the FOX news reports or try to read current news reports---

    As it turns out, the war against ISIS is not what the establishment media in the West make it out to be. On Wednesday, Maarouf told The Independent the fight against al-Qaeda was “not our problem” and admitted the mercenaries he leads with U.S., Saudi and Qatari help conduct joint operations with Jabhat al-Nusra, seen as the de facto al-Qaeda branch in Syria. Maarouf told the newspaper he does not have a problem working with al-Qaeda so long as the objective is the ouster of the al-Assad government.

    In fact, according to Maarouf, his benefactors told him to provide al-Nusra with weapons despite the aforementioned propaganda campaign designed to give the impression “moderates” are fighting the good fight against al-Qaeda in Syria. He said if “the people who support us [U.S., Saudis, Qataris] tell us to send weapons to another group, we send them. They asked us a month ago to send weapons to Yabroud so we sent a lot of weapons there. When they asked us to do this, we do it.”
    According to Barak Barfi, a research fellow for the globalist funded New America Foundation, al-Nusra, the al-Qaeda-linked group known for summarily executing Syrian soldiers and other atrocities (including beheading Christians; see the video above), receives weapons indirectly from SRF.

    Maarouf’s revelation, however, is not news. In December, The Washington Post and other establishment media outlets reported the United States and its partners are involved in a “cold-war style of warfare” which includes the use of “proxies to punish Assad.” The mention of the term Cold War alludes to covert intelligence operations, the hallmark of decades of undeclared warfare against the Soviet Union.
    In an effort to minimize the fact the United States is colluding with an enemy aligned with a terrorist organization allegedly responsible for attacking the United States, the Post reported:
    The United States government knowingly contributed to the territorial gains of radical Islamists allied to our gravest enemy in an effort to hijack the Syrian Revolution and install Sharia Law in a very rich and very powerful country. In an effort to thwart the fear of the public that the U.S. would be supporting radical Jihadists, the secretary of state made a statement that he was certain that only 25 percent of the rebels were Jihadists. There are roughly a hundred eighty thousand Syrian Rebels, and as of now an estimated one hundred thousand of those rebels fall under the command of the Islamic Front.
    In other words, in an effort to subvert a sovereign nation and decide who will rule over it (and who will cooperate with the financial elite), the United States is only partially collaborating with declared enemies. This is, we are assured, better than fully cooperating with them.
    Once again, this is sheer and transparent propaganda designed to minimize the obvious fact the United States does not differentiate between enemies and allies (who often, as Taliban did, become tomorrow’s sworn enemies if so declared by geopolitical imperatives decided upon by the global elite).
    “For half a century the United States and many of its allies saw what I call the ‘Islamic right’ as convenient partners in the Cold War,” writes Robert Dreyfuss in his book, Devil’s Game: How the United States Helped Unleash Fundamentalist Islam. The Afghan Mujahideen, enthusiastically supported by the CIA in its successful covert war against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, would ultimately produce both al-Qaeda and the Taliban, a fact admitted by Jimmy Carter’s National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski, CIA director and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

    Naturally, this fact – the United States not only creates and supports the likes of al-Qaeda and al-Nusra, to name but two, but itself constitutes the largest, most organized, well-funded and dangerous terrorist organization in the world – is never mentioned by the establishment media, even when U.S. proxies, headed up by war profiteers such as Jamal Maarouf, admit they are in league with brutal sadists who behead innocents, execute prisoners of war, and desecrate Christian churches.

  • happygambler34 happygambler34 Jul 15, 2014 2:02 PM Flag

    Then why did the writer take an opinion on nutrition?

    I don't know that the writer took a position on nutrition other than throwing in a comment for digestion, and in your case indigestion. The point is the kids aren't buying or eating Mardelle's #$%$ food, and it's being tossed, wadting $millions in tax bucks. Do you care about throwing away tax $$$$$s?

  • Only three days ago, on Friday the 13th, President Obama vowed he would not put U.S. boots on the ground in Iraq. “We will not be sending troops back into combat in Iraq,” Obama said at a White House press conference. “But I have asked my security advisers to prepare a range of other options.”

    Now comes word that Obama has, in fact, ordered that several hundred armed troops be immediately deployed in and around the collapsing country. Even though these U.S. forces are “armed” — if Obama is to be believed (a BIG “if”) — they will not be fighting.
    Now what kind of sense does that make? And if the president says they aren’t wearing boots because he promises “no boots on the ground”, then….

    The Associated Press reports on the troop deployment:
    The U.S. is…considering sending an additional contingent of special forces soldiers as Baghdad struggles to repel a rampant insurgency, even as the White House insists anew that America will not be dragged into another war.

    President Barack Obama notified Congress Monday that up to 275 troops could be sent to Iraq to provide support and security for U.S. personnel and the American Embassy in Baghdad. About 170 of those forces have already arrived and another 100 soldiers be on standby in a nearby country until they are needed, a U.S. official said.

    While Obama has vowed to keep U.S. forces out of combat in Iraq, he said in his notification to Congress that the personnel moving into the region are equipped for direct fighting.

    And separately, three U.S. officials said the White House was considering sending a contingent of special forces soldiers to Iraq. Their limited mission — which has not yet been approved — would focus on training and advising beleaguered Iraqi troops, many of whom have fled their posts across the nation’s north and west as the al-Qaida-inspired insurgency has advanced in the worst threat to the country since American troops left in 2011.

    So, the Obama administration is sending U.S. warfighters into Iraq, but they won’t be doing any fighting. Really, is this “depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is” rhetorical nonsense? Is this hollow wordplay and delicate dancing of the most cynical sort?

    How does anyone know what will or will not happen in a nation being overrun by bloodthirsty insurgents affiliated with al Qaeda? Even if our soldiers are authorized only as advisors and trainers, what the heck are they supposed to do if/when terrorists start shooting at them?

  • This afternoon's presidential press conference on Iraq, the biggest news being the announced deployment of 300 US special forces operators into the country. As expected, President Obama repeatedly stressed that these troops will fulfill an explicitly non-combat role, promising that no US forces will return to combat duty in Iraq. He did, however, say that the military isprepared to take "targeted and precise military action" of the situation warrants it. He's presumably speaking of airstrikes against ISIS targets from drones or manned aircraft. Obama placed a great deal of emphasis on Iraq finding a "political solution" to its troubles, praising the nation's multi-sectarian elections in recent years. In doing so, he nudged Iraqi President Nouri al-Maliki to step down -- a heavily hinted call for, well, regime change. A Maliki spokesman quickly shot down the implication. Obama's politically-focused message and demands for a more inclusive Iraqi government seemed wildly out of step with realities on the ground. Of course a political solution is the goal, but the country's on fire right now, with hardcore militants controlling massive swaths of land and threatening to lay siege to the capital city. Iraq's political situation isn't the issue at the moment:

    If the extremists' march continues, there will be no country remaining to govern, and in its wake will be a failed state awash with anti-American, anti-West jihadists. Obama explicitly conceded this scenario poses a genuine threat to US national security, yet his solution to the urgent, full-blown crisis is to send in a few hundred troops in an advisory role...and possibly some bombing. Maybe. Administration critics have argued that the bloody chaos was predictable and avoidable. As a candidate, Obama proposed pulling American forces out of Iraq in a careful and responsible manner. Part of his stated vision included a residual pool of US troops in Iraq, whose mission would be to fortify the Iraqi military and to repel serious threats from terrorist groups. Such a force could have prevented today's disaster, but it never materialized. Asked by CNN's Jim Acosta whether he regrets the failure the secure a status of forces agreement (SOFA) needed to make that happen, Obama insisted that there's nothing to regret because it wasn't his fault.

  • happygambler34 happygambler34 Jun 13, 2014 10:36 AM Flag

    Why didn't LOTUS empty GITMO of all terrorists, and allow them to return to their mission of Killing all infidels. The next 9/11 will now commence on the islamic jihad terrorist's timetable.

  • happygambler34 happygambler34 Jun 12, 2014 3:00 PM Flag

    Only by old, uneducated, socially isolated, clumsy-which you MAY be destined to become....that is if the booz doesn't take you down before that...

  • in Bergdahl deal locked up at Guantanamo Bay – just three years ago!

    · Khairulla Khairkhwa was part of the Taliban's highest governing body before the U.S. invaded Afghanistan in 2001
    · In 2011 he sued President Barack Obama, demanding habeas corpus rights that would deny the government to imprison him indefinitely without a trial
    · The Obama administration argued that he was too dangerous to consider releasing, and a federal judge agreed
    · Khairkhwa was held at the Guantanamo Bay military detention center until a week ago, when the president released him and four other Taliban leaders
    · They were swapped for Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, who has since been accused of being a wartime deserter

    In 2011 a federal judge ruled that one of the five Taliban terror leaders traded by the White House for Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl nine days ago was too dangerous to consider releasing, even if he had little chance of ever receiving a trial.

    The same Obama administration that downplayed the likelihood Khairulla Said Wali Khairkhwa could return to the battlefield against the U.S. argued three years ago that he should be denied habeas corpus rights and kept locked away in an orange jumpsuit at the Guantanamo Bay detention facility.

    The U.S. solicitor general's office, arguing on behalf of the president – the named defendant in a federal lawsuit – told the court that Khairkhwa was in the class of terrorists who were actively involved in the leadership of a group that killed Americans.

  • happygambler34 happygambler34 Jun 4, 2014 6:22 PM Flag

    to report on the thickness

    That's your job...what are the thickness numbers?

  • happygambler34 happygambler34 Jun 4, 2014 2:03 PM Flag

    Thank you for your elequint(sic) response, and brilliaint(sic) observations.

    However....they don't change the fact of LOTUS anemic 6 year job growth record. At the present rate his policies will take decades to produce any meaningful employment. Thank God(in HOTUS case allah) there're only 2 + years left in his economically destructive regime.

    Stocks fell on Wednesday after a report showed private-sector job creation failed to live up to expectations in May.
    The Dow Jones Industrial Average was 45 points lower in early morning trading, the S&P 500 fell 5 points and the Nasdaq shed 15 points.
    The markets responded to the latest reading from ADP and Moody's Analytics which found companies added 179,000 positions last month, well below expectations of 215,000 new jobs.
    Other data showed the U.S. trade gap expanding in April as Americans bought large amounts of consumer goods, cars and businessware from overseas.
    Later on Wednesday, the Federal Reserve was releasing its Beige Book of regional business conditions, with the anecdotal information coming ahead of a Federal Open Market Committee gathering later this month.
    Under Armour stock rose after Jefferies Group upgraded the sportswear retailer to buy from hold; FuelCell Energydeclined sharply after the maker of fuel-cell power plants tallied a larger loss in the second quarter, and Protective Life jumped after Dai-ichi Life Insurance said it would acquire the life insurer for 5.7 billion.
    The dollar dropped against other global currencies and the 10-year Treasury yield lost 3 basis points to 2.573 percent.

  • While the Obama administration is proudly touting how it was able to free an American soldier who was captured by the Taliban, what no one picked is the fact that Obama SMILED as soon as he heard the most famous war cry of Islam, "bismillah al-rahman al-rahim," Arabic for "in the name of Allah the most gracious, the most merciful." Watch Obama smile as soon as Bergdahl gives the most famous Muslim expression, the "Bismillah" or the "Basmallah":

    The "basmallah" is the Islamic expression for victory and only indicates that Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl's father is a Muslim.

    Think that the man is acting as "Muslim" for a stealth operation to rescue his son who is already in good hands in Germany? And what is with the long beard and trimmed mustache?

    No this is not a bum, biker, or a Santa Clause fan. When one gives the basmallah, trims his mustache and elongates his beard, it's the first sign of a convert to Islam, just as that an ex-Muslim putting on a cross and saying, "In the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit," is evidence enough of conversion to Christianity. But there is much more we obtained on this stealth jihadist.

    But first, Obama's smile says much. Obama has never declared the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and has no real testimony of converting to Christianity

    We were first hit with news from Brietbart that the Taliban said that Robert Bowe Bergdahl's son, Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, converted to Islam, changed his name to Abdullah, and even trained the Taliban in bomb making techniques.

    But is it the testimonies from his colleagues on his desertion, that confirm suspicions that these men are Jihadi converts?

  • Reply to

    Is Susan Rice a moron?

    by b767cpt1 Jun 3, 2014 11:11 PM
    happygambler34 happygambler34 Jun 4, 2014 11:33 AM Flag

    sticking her foot into her mouth again that "Bergdahl served honorably".

    Words stuffed in puppet's mouth by HOTUS...

34.50-0.14(-0.40%)Aug 22 4:00 PMEDT

Trending Tickers

Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.