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: Arthur Radley who wrote (70949)	4/8/2009 9:52:31 AM
From: Oeconomicus	5 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

"Thanks again for admitting the truth...." A poster here named Solon once asserted that achieving self-awareness is THE hallmark of being human. You have demonstrated that you are not yet there.

To: Arthur Radley who wrote (70949)	4/8/2009 11:10:48 AM
From: Bill	3 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 90947

<< Anger and bigotry must being eating you up! >> This is an idiotic and disgusting accusation. If I were still the mod here, I would ban you.

To: Arthur Radley who wrote (70949)	4/8/2009 2:40:43 PM
From: mph	6 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 90947

The fact is that Minnesota changed its laws in the 1800's. So don't you think your guy Obama lied when he said that it was not long ago that a person who looked like him could not vote or that voting would be made difficult for him in this country. I'd call that the real lie. It's the cheap playing of the race card by a typical huckster. In this case, a guy who's played the system and the race card to his consistent advantage.

To: Arthur Radley who wrote (70949)	4/9/2009 1:17:38 AM
From: Sully-	2 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 90947

Dude you must be too damn stupid to begin to grasp you scored a terrible Pyrrhic victory. And your "Anger and bigotry must being eating you up!" comment should be exactly how you should be feeling, not me. First, Power Line is nothing remotely close to a "hatred site" as you falsely asserted. Over the last few years I have followed their blogging they have proven themselves to be consistently accurate in discussing the issues from which they draw reality based conclusions. Perhaps you have come to see Power Line as a "hatred site" because they have repeatedly discredited your LWE version of reality with credible evidence & independently verifiable facts. In the blog post you attacked, Power Line accurately proved Obama lied while denigrating America on foreign soil. Not only is that unprecedented for an American President, it is nothing short of disgusting. I'll note your silence on that critical point. On the point you brought up, nothing Power Line said changes the fact Obama lied while denigrating America on foreign soil. In fact, Power Line was mostly correct in saying, <<< "A minority of states did "make it hard" for someone who "looks like Obama" to vote until "not long ago," but most did not, and the federal government certainly did not. There has never been a time when it was hard for people who look like Obama to vote here in Minnesota, for example." >>> You see, Minnesota allowed for black people to vote from 1867 forward. So for the last 132 years the Minnesota State constitution did NOT discriminate against black people. And the decision to deny blacks the right to vote in their first State Constitution [and for a total of 10 years] was entirely due to racist Democrats who fought hard against the Republicans desire to allow them the right to vote from the very beginning! If I were you I'd be deeply ashamed about Obama's calumnious lies & the true cause of the racial hatred by the Democrats rather than your pathetic attempt to try to turn a minor mistake into some false assertion about Power Line being a "hatred site". No doubt all of that reality is lost on you.

To: Arthur Radley who wrote (70949)	4/9/2009 5:14:53 AM
From: Sully-	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

Krauthammer’s Take NRO Staff The Corner From last night’s “All-Stars.” On Obama’s unannounced stop in Baghdad: <<< He is Commander in Chief, and he knows he's responsible, and he will be held responsible for the future of Iraq. I think what he did was necessary, but in a way it was a way to undo what he did in Europe, where he referred to Iraq in one of his speeches as a distraction. If you have a loved one who died in Iraq or who is now risking a life in Iraq, and your commander in chief is calling the effort a distraction, it's a bit of a blow. And I think overall he did increase his own popularity in Europe, but that's easy to do if you do it at the expense of your country. To various degrees of directness or obliqueness, he held America guilty for a range of offenses, a partial list of which includes arrogance, having caused the financial crisis, torture, genocide, racism, Hiroshima — he didn't even leave that one out — Guantanamo, of course, an insufficient respect for the Muslim world. And as we say, what did he get in return? On Afghanistan troops, nothing. On stimulus in Europe, nothing. And on Guantanamo, what did he get? The French offered to take one prisoner. Now, you'd think that is an attempt at Gallic humor. It was a serious offer. I guess the guy that comes out of Guantanamo will have to leave his swim buddy behind. >>> On the Obama administration’s approach to climate change: <<< The difference is the Bush administration wanted to impose unilateral limits on what we do as we decide as a sovereign country. The problem is the Obama administration wants to engage in negotiations now in Munich that are going to end up in Copenhagen at the end of the year, where the countries of the third world, over 120 of them, are demanding huge reductions in carbon emission by the rich countries, almost up to 50 percent, which would constitute the largest transfer of wealth from rich to poor countries in history. It still doesn't include China and India. And it would impose enormous costs on the American consumer. That's why I think it doesn't have a chance. Even if adopted in Copenhagen, it will not pass the U.S. Congress by any means. The same way that Kyoto was rejected unanimously in the late 1990s in the Senate, it would happen again, although it wouldn't be unanimous. >>> corner.nationalreview.com

To: Arthur Radley who wrote (70949)	4/9/2009 5:50:44 AM
From: Sully-	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

The U.S. Congress' deception was, and continues to be, a major player in our financial meltdown. Deception Is Root Cause Of America's Ills By WALTER E. WILLIAMS Investor's Business Daily Posted Tuesday, April 07, 2009 4:20 PM PT Most Americans accept the continuing attack on tobacco companies and smokers, but how do they feel about the massive government deception? In 1998, 46 state attorneys general and major tobacco companies signed the Master Settlement Agreement. The major tobacco companies agreed, among other things, to give states $240 billion over 25 years to provide for smoking cessation programs and cover the health costs associated with using their product. In return, state attorneys general promised tobacco companies they wouldn't sue them and would use their lawmaking power to protect the major tobacco companies from competition from small tobacco companies. Of the $80 billion extorted so far, states have spent about 30% on health, not all tobacco-related, and less than 6% on smoking cessation programs. Instead, state legislatures spent the bulk of their tobacco money for items such as museum building, tax relief, rainy-day funds and other expenditures having nothing to do with tobacco or health. The U.S. Congress' deception was, and continues to be, a major player in our financial meltdown. In congressional hearings before the meltdown, on the soundness of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Rep. Maxine Waters said: "Through nearly a dozen hearings, we were frankly trying to fix something that wasn't broke. Mr. Chairman, we do not have a crisis at Freddie Mac, and particularly at Fannie Mae, under the outstanding leadership of Franklin Raines." Rep. Barney Frank, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee, said: "These two entities — Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — are not facing any kind of financial crisis. The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing." Other congressmen gave similar assurances. Unfortunately for our nation, the forces pushing for "affordable" housing won the day and saddled us with today's unprecedented financial disaster. How stupid is it of us to ask those who brought us "affordable" housing to now turn their attention to bringing us "affordable" health care? Congressional deception about government finances means today's children will face a financial disaster that will make today's mess seem like a walk in the park. What's called the public debt stands at $11 trillion and growing. That pales in comparison to the federal government's unfunded liability — obligations that are not covered by an asset of equal or greater value. Mike Whalen, former policy chairman of the Dallas-based National Center for Policy Analysis, commenting on last year's Social Security Trustees annual report on the state of the Social Security and Medicare programs, said, "The report on the state of entitlement programs is rather grim — the combined unfunded liabilities of both programs are $101 trillion." What that means is that in order for government to make good on its promises, Congress would have to put aside tens of trillions of dollars in the bank today. Keep in mind that our GDP is only $14 trillion. In the absence of massive tax increases or cuts in benefits, in order to meet its promises Congress must cease spending on one in four programs by 2020, such as education and highway construction, and one in two by 2030, and by 2050 or so all federal revenues will be spent supporting Social Security, Medicare and prescription drug benefits. Such a scenario is unsustainable. There will be economic and political chaos. Today's politicians are not likely to take measures to avoid the coming chaos because senior citizens, the major beneficiaries of Social Security and Medicare, vote in large numbers and will exact a high political price. Plus, neither today's senior citizens nor today's politicians will be alive in 2050. I'd be more optimistic if my fellow Americans were simply suffering from congressional deception as opposed to their not caring about the economic calamity that awaits tomorrow's Americans. I'd be even more optimistic if today's seniors started putting heat on Congress to allow those Americans who want nothing to do with Social Security to opt out. Copyright 2008 Creators Syndicate, Inc ibdeditorials.com