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 (67397)	6/25/2009 12:07:35 AM
From: PROLIFE	2 Recommendations Respond to of 224757

CALL AL GORE....QUICKLY...maybe he can schedule one of his global warming scam events when it is not snowing or freezing after all!!

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (67397)	6/25/2009 12:11:03 AM
From: PROLIFE	3 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224757

NewsReal BlogJune 23, 2009 Hide Your Wallets, Here Comes Al Gore Al Gore’s dream of reversing global warming is about to turn into a nightmare for the rest of us. Leaving aside the question of whether or not global warming even exists, House Democrats yesterday introduced a bill (the Waxman-Markey bill) which will only lead to job losses and higher costs for energy, while having no effect on the environment. Nobody denies that this bill is going to lighten the wallets of the average American, or that the poor are going to be particularly hard hit. The only question is, how hard? The highly reliable Congressional Budgeting Office estimates: “[A] 15 percent reduction in carbon emissions by 2020 through a cap-and-trade plan would cost the average American household $1,600 a year, with low-income households carrying a heavier burden. Lower-income households tend to spend more of their income on energy than higher-income households, because it is difficult to cut back on necessities like heating.” Remember, these figures are estimates. And when has a government cost estimate not been grossly understated? The Waxman-Markey bill is also going to cause the country to lose jobs — perhaps millions of jobs — due to the crippling burden it will impose on American industry. This is even acknowledged by the authors of the bill, as there is a fine print provision designed to provide relief for those who lose their jobs as a result of the legislation. “The Democrats’ bill has an unemployment provision that provides 70% of your job benefit for at least three years — in addition to any other unemployment benefits — if you lose your job because of that bill,” said Rep. Joe Barton (D-Texas). “They, at least tacitly, recognize that their bill is going to cost millions and millions of jobs.” Nonetheless, Gore continues to parrot the mantra that the Waxman-Markey bill will have the opposite effect. “I think the creation of jobs by this bill will far outstrip any losses,” Gore recently testified. “There would be potentially massive job losses if we did not adopt this legislation.” Democrats agree. The bill, they say, will stimulate employment “in the long run” by creating so-called “green jobs” such as making parts for windmills and growing grass on building rooftops. This boondoggle will amount to nothing more than a massive tax hike on every person in America.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (67397)	6/25/2009 12:13:31 AM
From: PROLIFE	2 Recommendations Respond to of 224757

A Clunker of a Bill By: Tom Purcell FrontPageMagazine.com \| Wednesday, June 24, 2009 I'm torn, if you want to know the truth. Last week, the United States Senate passed the “Cash for Clunkers” bill – they tucked it into an emergency war-funding bill – and President Obama will soon sign it into law. Here’s how the clunker bill works: If your current car averages 18 or fewer miles per gallon, you'll qualify for a $3,500 voucher toward the cost of a new car -- so long as the new car averages at least 4 mpg more. Better: If you buy a new car that averages 10 mpg better than your current car, the government will give you a $4,500 voucher. That is why I'm torn. I own two vehicles: a 2001 Nissan Maxima SE and a 1992 Chevy S-10 truck, both in excellent condition. My Maxima gets 19 mpg in the city -- it averages 22 mpg -- so it doesn't qualify for government dough. But my truck surely does. It only gets about 10 mpg. Of course, that isn't a problem. The truck sits in my father's garage most of the time. It goes out only when someone in my family needs to pick up a piece of furniture or some mulch. I love that truck. Its dated two-tone silver-and-maroon paint job, white-letter tires and red velour interior scream "1992." It's the kind of vehicle somebody like Bill Clinton might have used to pick up someone like Monica Lewinsky. Despite its coolness -- despite its near-mint condition -- the truck is 17 years old. In the real market -- the free market -- it is worth only $2,500. Which puts me in a troubling position. Once President Obama signs the clunker bill into law, my truck will instantly be worth $4,500. All I have to do is find a new vehicle that gets 22 mpg – not hard to do. Of course I don't need or want a new vehicle. I love my Maxima. And my truck is perfect for what it is intended to do. And I can't bear the thought of what will happen to my beloved truck if I take the deal. All vehicles traded in under the clunker program will be crushed into a block of steel and smelted. Not even the transmission or the motor can be salvaged. But then again, one must keep emotion out of financial decisions. Only the government is dumb enough to pay me $4,500 for a $2,500 vehicle -- and only a dummy would walk away from a $2,000 gain. Sure, I know what the critics are saying: The program's $1 billion price tag is a waste of money at a time when we're bleeding red ink. I know we've already squandered some $30 billion meddling in the private auto industry and have likely made things worse, not better. I know the unintended consequences of the government's clunker program will hit the poor and middle class the hardest. Even with government perks, many people can't afford a new car. Because the program will take thousands of used cars out of service, it will cause the cost of used cars to go up. I know the political class is trying to impose a desired outcome on us. They're eager for us to drive ever dinkier cars. I know they're bribing us -- with our own dough -- to make us bend to their will. But then again, this will surely be my last chance to qualify for a government perk of any kind. I'm generally on the paying end of government programs -- not the receiving end -- and all of us will be paying plenty more if Obama succeeds in signing a torrent of big-spending programs into law. And so I am torn. I had been happy with my two perfectly good vehicles, but, suddenly, I’m thrust into the throes of a major automotive decision. I've been avoiding my truck lately. Wracked with guilt -- I can't believe I may be bought off for a lousy 2,000 bucks -- I can't look my truck in the headlights. Such are the peculiar thoughts that only the government can produce.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (67397)	6/25/2009 7:15:30 AM
From: lorne	2 Recommendations Respond to of 224757

EPA Suppresses Internal Global Warming Study CEI Calls for Agency to Release Concealed Report by Richard Morrison June 24, 2009 cei.org Washington, D.C., June 24, 2009—The Competitive Enterprise Institute today charged that a senior official of the U.S. Environment Protection Agency actively suppressed a scientific analysis of climate change because of political pressure to support the Administration’s policy agenda of regulating carbon dioxide. As part of a just-ended public comment period, CEI submitted a set of four EPA emails, dated March 12-17, 2009, which indicate that a significant internal critique of the agency’s global warming position was put under wraps and concealed. The study the emails refer to, which ran counter to the administration’s views on carbon dioxide and climate change, was kept from circulating within the agency, was never disclosed to the public, and was not added to the body of materials relevant to EPA’s current “endangerment” proceeding. The emails further show that the study was treated in this manner not because of any problem with its quality, but for political reasons. “This suppression of valid science for political reasons is beyond belief,” said CEI General Counsel Sam Kazman. “EPA’s conduct is even more outlandish because it flies in the face of the President’s widely-touted claim that ‘the days of science taking a back seat to ideology are over.’” CEI’s filing requests that EPA make the suppressed study public, place it into the endangerment docket, and extend the comment period to allow public response to the new information. CEI is also requesting that EPA publicly declare that it will engage in no reprisals against the study’s author, a senior analyst who has worked at EPA for over 35 years.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (67397)	6/25/2009 7:16:16 AM
From: lorne	2 Recommendations Respond to of 224757

Obama-Odinga friendship affecting Iran? June 25, 2009 © 2009 wnd.com In his press conference on Tuesday, President Obama condemned the Iranian regime's use of violence to suppress the post-election protests, but he left the door open to a "wait and see" attitude toward whether or not the United States would accept President Ahmadinejad as the legitimate winner of the June 12 election, if that continues to stand as the final verdict of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei. Notably, during the press conference, President Obama dodged answering directly a question from Fox News regarding an invitation issued by the State Department for Iranian diplomats to visit U.S. embassies during the Independence Day holiday. If Obama intends to pursue direct negotiations with the Ahmadinejad government should the post-election violence fail to produce a new election, the administration may well be advised to contemplate how as series of photographs of Obama-supporting Kenyan Prime Minister Raila Odinga and President Ahmadinejad together might impact freedom fighters in Iran as well as the American public. To explore this question, WND has taken a close look at Kenya. Examining the extent to which Odinga and Obama have been willing to pursue direct negotiations with Ahmadinejad, WND continues to see a commonality in the foreign policies of both leaders, despite the Iranian regime's determination to suppress key freedoms within Iran, including the right to a free election. Even as post-election protests against the re-election of Ahmadinejad continue in Iran, Kenya's Odinga, a fellow Luo tribe member, who continues to receive the strong support of President Obama, moves closer to Iran. In a May 28 trip to Tehran, Odinga met with Ahmadinejad to agree to the establishment of Special Working Groups to advance the implementation of signed memoranda of understanding on a wide range of issues, including trade, banking, agriculture, oil and education, according to a joint communiqué issued at the end of the meeting. Ahmadinejad and Odinga This follows a Feb. 25 trip Ahmadinejad made to Kenya in which he held a one-on-one meeting with Odinga at the Laico Regency Hotel in Nairobi. WND previously reported that when then-Sen. Obama visited Kenya in 2006, the administration of President Kibaki objected that Odinga was using Obama's visit to win votes. Obama's repeated public appearances with Odinga and the senator's almost daily criticism of the Kigaki government added to the administration's objections. WND has also reported that Obama, with a donation of nearly $1 million, and a son of Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi were among the biggest contributors to Odinga's 2007 presidential campaign, according to an internal document obtained by WND in Kenya. WND has further reported that Odinga, prior to the 2007 election, concluded a written agreement with Muslim leaders stipulating that if they delivered him the Muslim vote, he would in turn, once elected, change the constitution to declare Islamic law as the ruling authority in Muslim-dominated regions. Odinga took over the office of prime minister in Kenya after his campaign called for protests of an election he lost by more than 200,000 votes to incumbent President Kibaki. The resulting violence by marauding Luo tribe members against Kibaki's majority Kikuyu tribe left 1,100 people dead, hundreds of thousands displaced from their homes and 800 Christian churches damaged or destroyed. No Islamic mosques were damaged. The violence appears to have been part of Odinga's campaign strategy. Former members of Odinga's Orange Democratic Movement party, or ODM, claim Obama did not call on Odinga to drop his voter-fraud campaign or withdraw from his pursuit of the presidency even after he lost and the violence erupted. WND has confirmed that at one point, then-United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan and U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice actually pressured Kenyan Vice President Kolonzo to step down from his position to bring the Odinga-connected Luo-mob protest violence to an end by appointing Odinga vice president so he could assume the nation's second-highest political office. When Kolonzo refused to step down, Annan and Rice proposed the Odinga-inspired plan of appointing him as prime minister, a position not defined in the Kenyan constitution, effectively allowing Odinga to share the head-of-state position with Kibaki.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (67397)	6/25/2009 7:32:45 AM
From: Sedohr Nod	5 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 224757

I'm probably finally past worrying about frost damage for the summer, which is great since it's about time to watch the 4th fireworks. But just for fun lets say you finally convinced me....what should I do first?....Send a check to Algore, give up my normal means of heating my house, live in an igloo in the winter, surrender my decision making to some dip pooed energy czar, take my grand kids on public transportation to see how elected officials are exempt from their own legislation, or maybe just become nomadic and move with the changing weather to survive....or some combination of all of those "choices"? But in the meantime, please feel free to let me know the next time it gets hot in southern Florida on any summer day.....don't forget to throw in Memphis or St. Louis.