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 : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (64997)	5/14/2009 12:50:39 PM
From: JakeStraw	1 Recommendation Respond to of 224749

Message 25644264

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (64997)	5/14/2009 12:53:58 PM
From: lorne	2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224749

ken...." This is a worldwide recession which started under the Bush Administration. Do you think the public will forget when this started?"..... So what....when it started is not as important as who caused it like branches of the democratic party such as acorn and of course complete fools like barney frank in charge of billions of dollars.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (64997)	5/14/2009 12:59:36 PM
From: TideGlider	1 Recommendation Respond to of 224749

Corporations will go off shore to protect themselves from Obama's harsh tax demands. Then Obama will go to lower and lower incomes to extract his taxes. He will confiscate more and more until all must look to the federal government for any crumbs they might be fortunate to get! Why go overseas when it's worse there

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (64997)	5/14/2009 1:00:39 PM
From: lorne	2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224749

ken...If this gets through it will prevent president hussein obama fromm getting second term even if their are a few voters like yourself LEFT who are still in love with him. It would be so easy for hussein to just prove he was born in the USA...if he was... bo No he just shows utter contempt for all American citizens. 2nd congressman: Prove eligibility Virginia representative signs onto plan to demand evidence May 13, 2009 By Bob Unruh © 2009 WorldNetDaily wnd.com Now there are two. A Virginia congressman, very quietly, has signed onto a measure in Congress that would require presidential candidates to verify their eligibility to hold the highest elected office in the United States. WND earlier reported when freshman Rep. Bill Posey, R-Fla., filed H.R. 1503, an amendment to the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971. According to the Library of Congress' bill-tracking website, H.R. 1503 would "require the principal campaign committee of a candidate for election to the office of president to include with the committee's statement of organization a copy of the candidate's birth certificate, together with such other documentation as may be necessary to establish that the candidate meets the qualifications for eligibility to the Office of President under the Constitution." The plan has been referred to the House committee on House administration, where it has remained. Now, Virginia Republican Bob Goodlatte has signed on as a co-sponsor, putting a notice on his website that it's one of the efforts in which he's joining. "Another man with a spine – there are at least two up there on the Hill," wrote a WND reader who has followed the Posey plan. George Cecala, a spokesman for Posey office, told WND that constituents had been calling, questioning whether Barack Obama – who has publicized a Certificate of Live Birth, but not his official birth certificate – has demonstrated that he meets the Constitution's requirement to be a natural-born citizen. "Those are legitimate constitutional concerns," Cecala said. "Folks have brought the issue up, and the court really hasn't clarified. And I think American citizens have a right to have answers from their government." Where's the proof Barack Obama was born in the U.S. or that he fulfills the "natural-born American" clause in the Constitution? If you still want to see it, join more than 365,000 others and sign up now! "When 7-year-olds play soccer in Brevard County, to be in Little League they have to prove their residency," Cecala said. "To be president there are three requirements: one is citizenship, two is the age of 35, and three, you have to have been a resident for 14 years. We're simply saying when you file your statement of candidacy with the FEC, you should also file documentation that you fulfill the three requirements to be president. "Opponents of President Bush used the 2000 election results and the court decisions to question the legitimacy of President Bush to serve as president," explained Rep. Posey in an official statement. "Opponents of President Obama are raising the birth certificate issue as a means of questioning his eligibility to serve as president. Neither of these situations is healthy for our republic. This bill, by simply requiring such documentation for future candidates for president will remove this issue as a reason for questioning the legitimacy of a candidate elected as president." Goodlatte appeared to have issued no such formal announcement as he signed onto the plan. WND has reported on dozens of legal challenges to Obama's status as a "natural born citizen." The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President." Some of the lawsuits question whether he was actually born in Hawaii, as he insists. If he was born out of the country, Obama's American mother, the suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time. Other challenges have focused on Obama's citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born. Complicating the situation is Obama's decision to spend sums estimated in the hundreds of thousands of dollars to avoid releasing a state birth certificate that would put to rest all of the questions. Although Obama officials have told WND all such allegations are "garbage," here is a partial listing and status update for some of the cases over Obama's eligibility: New Jersey attorney Mario Apuzzo has filed a case on behalf of Charles Kerchner and others alleging Congress didn't properly ascertain that Obama is qualified to hold the office of president. Pennsylvania Democrat Philip Berg has three cases pending, including Berg vs. Obama in the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, a separate Berg vs. Obama which is under seal at the U.S. District Court level and Hollister vs. Soetoro a/k/a Obama, (now dismissed) brought on behalf of a retired military member who could be facing recall to active duty by Obama. Leo Donofrio of New Jersey filed a lawsuit claiming Obama's dual citizenship disqualified him from serving as president. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court but denied a full hearing. Cort Wrotnowski filed suit against Connecticut's secretary of state, making a similar argument to Donofrio. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court, but was denied a full hearing. Former presidential candidate Alan Keyes headlines a list of people filing a suit in California, in a case handled by the United States Justice Foundation, that asks the secretary of state to refuse to allow the state's 55 Electoral College votes to be cast in the 2008 presidential election until Obama verifies his eligibility to hold the office. The case is pending, and lawyers are seeking the public's support. Chicago lawyer Andy Martin sought legal action requiring Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle to release Obama's vital statistics record. The case was dismissed by Hawaii Circuit Court Judge Bert Ayabe. Lt. Col. Donald Sullivan sought a temporary restraining order to stop the Electoral College vote in North Carolina until Barack Obama's eligibility could be confirmed, alleging doubt about Obama's citizenship. His case was denied. In Ohio, David M. Neal sued to force the secretary of state to request documents from the Federal Elections Commission, the Democratic National Committee, the Ohio Democratic Party and Obama to show the presidential candidate was born in Hawaii. The case was denied. Also in Ohio, there was the Greenberg v. Brunner case which ended when the judge threatened to assess all case costs against the plaintiff. In Washington state, Steven Marquis sued the secretary of state seeking a determination on Obama's citizenship. The case was denied. In Georgia, Rev. Tom Terry asked the state Supreme Court to authenticate Obama's birth certificate. His request for an injunction against Georgia's secretary of state was denied by Georgia Superior Court Judge Jerry W. Baxter. California attorney Orly Taitz has brought a case, Lightfoot vs. Bowen, on behalf of Gail Lightfoot, the vice presidential candidate on the ballot with Ron Paul, four electors and two registered voters. She also has brought forward several other cases and has conducted several public campaigns to generate awareness of the issue. In Texas, Darrel Hunter vs. Obama later was dismissed. In Ohio, Gordon Stamper vs. U.S. later was dismissed. In Texas, Brockhausen vs. Andrade. In Washington, L. Charles Cohen vs. Obama. In Hawaii, Keyes vs. Lingle, dismissed.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (64997)	5/14/2009 1:12:08 PM
From: TideGlider	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224749

Poll shows on economic issues, the country's conservative vs liberal roughly 3 to 1. And on social issues, its 60-40 conservative over liberal. So why is Obama President with the Pelosi-Reid-Waxman-Dodd-Frank Democrats running Congress? The 90% + liberal news and entertainment media has something to do with it. Still the Biggest Missing Story in Politics By Bruce Walker In August of last year I wrote an article, "The Biggest Missing Story in Politics," which reviewed the single most important datum in the last thirteen Battleground Polls over a period stretching from early 2002 to late 2008. The critical fact, completely ignored by almost everyone, was that in answering Question D3, which asked the respondent what he considered his ideology to be, sixty percent of the American people described themselves as "conservative" or "very conservative." In every single Battleground Poll, conservatives vastly outnumbered not only liberals, but moderates and undecided respondents combined. The Battleground Poll itself is a bipartisan poll, combining the resources of the Tarrance Group and Lake Research Partners. Unlike many polls driven by newspapers, networks, or other agenda driven organizations, this poll is one of the few which has no ideological agenda or partisan bias. The last Battleground Poll, which came out after my article, no longer revealed the answer to Question D3. Did that mean that America, suddenly, stopped being an overwhelmingly conservative nation and had been seduced by Obama into being moderate or Leftist? No. The Tarrance Group did reveal the ideological breakdown of Americans, although in a different way than in the thirteen prior Battleground Polls. Those earlier polls had asked people to describe themselves as "very conservative," "somewhat conservative," "moderate," "don't know," "somewhat liberal," or "very liberal." Those who chose "very conservative" or "somewhat conservative" were as low in some of the thirteen polls as 58% of the nation and as high in other polls as 63% of the nation, and the average of the polls was a rock solid 60%, year in and year out. The Tarrance Group chose to look at ideology differently in its post-election poll. Respondents were asked to refine their definition of "conservative." So instead of being asked about the intensity of their ideology (i.e. "very conservative" versus "somewhat conservative"), the Battleground Poll changed the question. Two questions replace the old Question D3. Now Americans were asked on social issues if they were "very conservative," "somewhat conservative," "moderate," "somewhat liberal" or "very liberal" as well as on fiscal issues if they were "very conservative," "somewhat conservative," "moderate," "somewhat liberal," or "very liberal." The Tarrance Group also provided data on the answers to this question within political parties. The responses illuminated some aspects of the prior polls, but the over all result was the same: Americans, overwhelmingly, are conservative. There were some differences between social conservatives and fiscal conservatives. Twenty-six percent of Americans call themselves "very conservative" on fiscal issues and forty-three percent consider themselves "somewhat conservative" on fiscal issues. One percent of America is moderate on fiscal issues -- that vital "center" of American politics! -- and three percent "don't know." Twenty-two percent of Americans are "somewhat liberal" on fiscal issues, and a piddling five percent of Americans are "very liberal" on fiscal issues. When the mushy "moderate" and "don't know" respondents are excluded, fiscal conservatives outnumber fiscal liberals by seventy-four percent to twenty-six percent. Social conservatives are the clear majority of America too, although the numbers are not quite as overwhelming. Thirty-four percent of America, more than one person in three, is "very conservative" on social issues and nineteen percent are "somewhat conservative" on social issues. One percent is moderate on social issues - again, that vital "center" of American politics! - and seven percent "don't know." Twenty percent are "somewhat liberal" on social issues and nineteen percent are "very liberal" on social issues. When the mushy "don't know" and moderates are taken out, social conservatives outnumber social liberals fifty-nine percent to forty-one percent. Tarrance also helps explain what Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh are so popular with Republicans. Seventy-four percent of Republicans are both social and fiscal conservatives. Ninety-one percent of Republicans are fiscal conservative. And seventy-seven percent of Republicans are social conservatives. Any effort to change the Republican brand ought to begin with that dramatic fact. What about Obama's own political party, the Democrats? Only forty-two percent of Democrats are both social liberals and fiscal liberals. Perhaps more amazing, twenty-three percent of Democrats, almost one in four, describe themselves as both social conservative and fiscal conservative. Forty-seven percent of Democrats describe themselves as fiscal conservatives, and thirty-four percent of Democrats describe themselves as social conservatives. Fifty-eight percent of Democrats consider themselves either a fiscal conservative or a social conservative or both. These results, more detailed and more informative than past responses to Question D3 in previous Battleground Polls, do not alter the profoundly conservative character of the American electorate at all. A social conservative, who was perceived as a social conservative running against a social liberal, would win an easy majority of the American people in any election. A fiscal conservative, who was perceived as a fiscal conservative running against a fiscal liberal, would win a landslide greater than any in the history of these two political parties. A candidate perceive as both a social conservative and a fiscal conservative would win one quarter of the Democrat Party vote, if the Democrat was perceived as a liberal, and sweep the nation easily. In fact, if a Democrat ran for his party's nomination as a conservative - and if the other candidates for the nomination were perceived as liberals - he ought to be able to compete for the fifty-eight percent of Democrats who were social conservatives, fiscal conservatives, or both. The biggest story in American politics has been answered again, with the data even more detailed and refined. The answer is the same - just the same - America is still, in every way and from every vantage, a conservative nation. Bruce Walker is the author of two books: Sinisterism: Secular Religion of the Lie, and his recently published book, The Swastika against the Cross: The Nazi War on Christianity. americanthinker.com Hat tip to Brumar! Message 25644450