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: Brumar89 who wrote (76130)	12/20/2009 11:55:09 PM
From: Sully-	3 Recommendations Respond to of 90947

This should be a scandal of major proportions, but it will be swept down the LWE memory hole of inconvenient truths. Libs simply can't ever admit to anything that discredits an issue they are pushing, particularly one that would allow them to grab more power to control the economy & limit our liberties. As for Wikipedia; It's not like we didn't already know their overt LWE bias. This just adds more proof of it.

To: Brumar89 who wrote (76130)	12/21/2009 12:31:54 AM
From: Sully-	2 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 90947

Obamacare Marches On By: Yuval Levin The Corner The story of the day is certainly Senator Ben Nelson’s shameless perfidy—giving up his pro-life principles in return for swindling taxpayers in the other 49 states into paying all of Nebraska’s future new Medicaid costs. The deal he struck would undermine both the logic underlying the Hyde Amendment and the logic underlying the Medicaid system. There is no conceivable policy argument for the way the new bill treats Nebraska, it’s simply a case of a senator’s vote being purchased with taxpayer dollars. But the bigger and more significant story is what Nelson’s decision now enables—that is, the larger Reid health care bill, which now looks far more likely to pass the Senate (though it still faces a tough road after that). It’s easy to get caught up in the daily tactics and forget what we’re getting ourselves into here. The Reid bill is the embodiment of the Democrats’ attitude that they just have to pass something, whatever it is. About the only thing that can be said in favor of this bill is that it is something. Otherwise, everything that can be said about it redounds in its disfavor. The CBO assessment of the bill tells the appalling story. We are going to raise taxes by half a trillion dollars over the next ten years, increase spending by more than a trillion dollars, cut Medicare by $470 billion but use that money to fund a new entitlement rather than to fix Medicare itself, bend the health care cost curve up rather than down, insert layers of bureaucracy between doctors and patients, and compel and subsidize universal participation in a failed system of health insurance rather than reform or improve it. Indeed, this bill will make it exceedingly difficult to fix our health insurance financing system in the future, since it sucks dry the potential means of such reform but leaves the fundamental cost problem essentially untouched (and in some respects worsened.) After all the back and forth, pulling and tugging, it is hard to see what is left in this bill that any member of Congress, liberal or conservative, would want to support. The public seems to see that, and is increasingly opposed to the bill, but for now Democrats in congress still persist. It’s no wonder Obama, Reid, and Pelosi want to rush this process through before their rank and file members can grasp what they’re doing. But it’s a bit of a wonder that those rank and file members so far seem to be playing along. Ben Nelson, Mary Landrieu, and a few others have been bought with taxpayer-funded favors for their states. What’s everyone else’s excuse? corner.nationalreview.com

To: Brumar89 who wrote (76130)	1/11/2010 8:29:57 AM
From: FJB	2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

Can’t Hide the Decline of Google “Climategate” search results January 10, 2010 · 9 comments climategate.com Air Vent today brought up something we’ve been noticing as well. At one point, there were over 50 million Google search results for for the term “climategate.” When we purchased the domain name climategate.com a couple months ago, I remember there were just over ten million, and since then we’ve watched the number dwindle down what we have today: 1,950,000. In fact, when Air Vent wrote their article earlier today, they said it showed 2.2 million results. Between our two testings, that’s a quarter of a million fewer pages in less than a day. At this rate, climategate will cease to exist on Google in eight more days. So what of the other search engines. Here are the numbers at this very moment: Yahoo: 30,100,000 Bing: 51,400,000 No declines with them. Put this together with their buddies over at Wikipedia who don’t call the climategate page “climategate” (they call it “Climatic Research Unit hacking incident”); and with their buddies over at GE who are working with them in green energy projects, and it kind of make one wonder, don’t it now? Not that Google would ever manipulate their data. Here, you can prove it yourself. Goto to Google.com and key in the search field, “Christianity is” and see all the auto suggestions like “Christinaity is bullshit” that come up. Then try it with any other religion, except Islam. When you are done with the world’s religions, try “Islam is.” Huh? There is nothing there. You see, just as Google is watching out for our best interests and not discouraging negative comments towards Islam, they also know that it’s in our best interest to not keep on keeping on with the absurd “Denier” crap. Here’s to the thought police.

To: Brumar89 who wrote (76130)	10/19/2010 3:18:02 PM
From: TimF	7 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

Climate ‘Propagandist’ Banned by Wikipedia October 15, 2010 12:00 P.M. By Edward John Craig Remember William Connolley? Team Green’s point man at Wikipedia has censored his last climate-science entry. Lawrence Solomon — who wrote about Connolley for NRO back in 2008 — does a victory lap in the Financial Post: William Connolley, arguably the world’s most influential global warming advocate after Al Gore, has lost his bully pulpit. Connolley did not wield his influence by the quality of his research or the force of his argument but through his administrative position at Wikipedia, the most popular reference source on the planet. Through his position, Connolley for years kept dissenting views on global warming out of Wikipedia, allowing only those that promoted the view that global warming represented a threat to mankind. As a result, Wikipedia became a leading source of global warming propaganda, with Connolley its chief propagandist. His career as a global warming propagandist has now been stopped, following a unanimous verdict that came down today through an arbitration proceeding conducted by Wikipedia. In the decision, a slap-down for the once-powerful Connolley by his peers, he has been barred from participating in any article, discussion or forum dealing with global warming. In addition, because he rewrote biographies of scientists and others he disagreed with, to either belittle their accomplishments or make them appear to be frauds, Wikipedia barred him — again unanimously — from editing biographies of those in the climate change field. The rest here. nationalreview.com