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 : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sully- who wrote (59886)	6/12/2007 1:23:31 AM
From: Sully-	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

You have to hand it to the Democrats: when it comes to creative corruption, Enron had nothing on them. Tumbling Democrats Power Line "Ethically challenged" doesn't really do the Democrats justice. Picture a gang of drunken sailors who have broken into the ship's rum supply, and you're near the mark. Today, House Minority Leader John Boehner has a column at Townhall on the latest outrage. Read it all for the details (link below), but the essence is that the Dems have figured out a way to foil the earmark transparency reforms the Republicans enacted when they were in control of the House. The Dems' scheme is to establish a slush fund that will allow them to "air drop" pork projects into legislation at the conference committee stage, when it's too late for them to be identified publicly. You have to hand it to the Democrats: when it comes to creative corruption, Enron had nothing on them. I think the voters are starting to notice. Scott Rasmussen's latest survey has Harry Reid in a dead heat with Scooter Libby, each with a 19% approval rating. And Reid hasn't even been convicted of anything yet! Rasmussen attributes Reid's dismal standing to his visibility on the immigration bill, and that no doubt played a part. I suspect, though, that word of the Democrats' corruption is starting to leak out. UPDATE: One more thing--given that President Bush's approval rating is approximately double Harry Reid's, how soon do you think the media will start referring to Reid's "unpopularity" and his low approval ratings every time he's mentioned in a story? Yeah, that's what I think, too. To comment on this post, go here. plnewsforum.com powerlineblog.com townhall.com rasmussenreports.com

To: Sully- who wrote (59886)	6/12/2007 10:22:17 AM
From: Oeconomicus	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

"I can't think of a single person I know (3D) who favors allowing any illegal aliens to remain here scot free* if they've been here for at least 2 years."* Emphasis added. Who said anything about "scot free"? "And I bet most folks asked those same questions aren't thinking about the fact that it's likely there will be pathetic enforcement just like there hasn't been for the last few decades (and I'm certain the MSM didn't mention that fact in their poll either)." Actually, they DID ask whether people thought our current immigration policy "works pretty well" or is in need of "fundamental changes" or a "complete rebuild". 90% chose one of the latter two answers, indicating near-unanimous dissatisfaction with the status quo. But if you wanted them to ask "do you think enforcement will be any less pathetic under this reform than over the last few decades?", then yeah, they didn't ask that. Nor are they likely to because it's a ridiculously loaded and leading question, not suitable for an objective poll. Perhaps some anti-immigrant blog could use it in an online poll and get the 99.9% "no" answers they want, then post links to their "results" on a zillion other blogs to spread their new "truth". And speaking of objectivity or lack thereof in polling, don't you think it's just a tad disingenuous to cite the answers to one question as proof of opposition and then dismiss the answers to two other questions in the same poll that contradict that conclusion, arguing that the poll was somehow rigged by the "leftist MSM"? You can do better than that, Sully. The questions they asked are right there at pollingreport.com. If the poll is systematically leading people to the "desired" answers, show me. Otherwise, you are merely rationalizing dismissal of evidence you simply don't like.