Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: CYBERKEN who wrote (13217)	10/16/2006 1:25:44 AM
From: RMF	Respond to of 71588

The "Bush Boom"...LOL Don't you mean the "Bush Broom"....the thing that's gonna sweep so many Republicans out of office...

To: CYBERKEN who wrote (13217)	10/16/2006 10:20:11 AM
From: Mr. Palau	Respond to of 71588

did you buy marky-mark a drink this weekend? Page Scandal Expands? "Federal prosecutors in Arizona have opened a preliminary investigation into an unspecified allegation related to a camping trip that" Rep. Jim Kolbe (R-AZ) "took with two former pages and others in 1996," the AP reports. Meanwhile, Wonkette says disgraced former Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL) -- who is supposed to be in rehab for alcoholism -- was spotted in a nightclub in Austin, TX over the weekend."

To: CYBERKEN who wrote (13217)	10/16/2006 3:52:57 PM
From: Mr. Palau	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 71588

jimmy talent on his way out after the goppers voter suppresion efforts failed "Supreme Court tosses voter ID law KELLY WIESE Associated Press JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. - The Missouri Supreme Court on Monday struck down a new law requiring voters to show a photo ID at the polls, upholding a lower judge's decision. A lower judge ruled last month that the ID requirement was an unconstitutional infringement on the fundamental right to vote. The Supreme Court agreed in a 6-1 unsigned opinion. The law required voters to present a photo identification card issued by Missouri or the federal government to cast a ballot starting with the November election. The court found the requirement violated several provisions in the state constitution. The court said requiring otherwise legitimate voters to obtain an appropriate ID imposed too big a burden on their voting rights. The law would have allowed those lacking such an ID this fall to cast a provisional ballot upon meeting certain conditions. In future elections, only the elderly, disabled and those with religious objections to carrying a photo ID could vote without one, and only by provisional ballot. Provisional ballots are set apart from regular ballots, and election authorities later determine whether they should count by, among other things, checking whether their signatures match those on file and if they're in the right polling place. Supporters of the ID requirement said it was necessary to prevent voter fraud and increase confidence in the election process. Opponents argued people impersonating others when voting is rare, and that the ID requirement would especially harm the poor, elderly and disabled who may be less likely to have a driver's license."