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: Mr. Palau who wrote (61382)	7/28/2007 6:11:51 PM
From: Sully-	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

I don't know. I think that Power Line, National Review, Investor's Business Daily, ET AL have done a good job presenting the facts, including sworn testimony in proper context. Perhaps you can show us some clear examples of perjury replete with credible evidence & testimony given in proper context. If not STFU about it. :-)

To: Mr. Palau who wrote (61382)	7/28/2007 6:12:03 PM
From: Sully-	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

Is This A Coup? If Not, What Is It? Power Line The Democrats' unconstitutional usurpation of power continues: Chuck Schumer, possibly the wackiest of all Capitol Hill Democrats, announces a change in the Constitution: <<< New York Sen. Charles E. Schumer, a powerful member of the Democratic leadership, said Friday the Senate should not confirm another U.S. Supreme Court nominee under President Bush "except in extraordinary circumstances." "We should reverse the presumption of confirmation," Schumer told the American Constitution Society convention in Washington. "The Supreme Court is dangerously out of balance. We cannot afford to see Justice Stevens replaced by another Roberts, or Justice Ginsburg by another Alito." >>> I guess "dangerously out of balance" means 5-4. What Schumer really means, of course, is that he wants to hold the fort for a year and a half so that a Democratic President can be elected, and the Court can be "dangerously out of balance," i.e., 5-4 in the other direction. It's hard to say how seriously anyone takes Chuck S., who is more arrogant than the average Democratic Senator, but not any smarter. Should a Supreme Court justice die or retire, and should Senate Democrats reject a series of highly-qualified Bush nominees, the Democrats will no doubt pay a price in 2008. So, as they say: bring it on! To comment on this post, go here. plnewsforum.com powerlineblog.com politico.com