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: Greg or e who wrote (76984)	1/24/2010 10:07:52 AM
From: Brumar89	2 Recommendations Respond to of 90947

Roe v. Wade Must Go John on January 23, 2010 at 9:08 am Politico has the story of nervous pro-abortion liberals who were unnerved by this week’s overturning of parts of McCain-Feingold: “Yesterday’s Roberts court decision, which exhibited a stunning disregard for settled law of decades’ standing, is terrifying to those of us who care deeply about the Constitutional protections the court put in place for women’s access to abortion,” said Nancy Northup of the Center for Reproductive Rights. “We are deeply concerned….Yesterday’s decision shows the court will reach out to take an opportunity to wholesale reverse a precedent the hard right has never liked.” “It is worrisome beyond the direct impact of yesterday’s ruling on election law,” said, Jessica Arons, the director of the Women’s Health and Rights Program at the Center for American Progress. “It’s certainly cause for concern.” To quote an old monster movie… Be afraid. Be very afraid. In most civilized countries in the world abortion law is set by legislatures who are able to modify law to accommodate changes in technology and our understanding of human natology. Not so in the US where the overreach of a single Justice has led to an untenable situation in a democracy where the people have no say in the law. It’s about time that changed. Liberals have lived by the courts, always seeking to override the people with the unalterable decision of experts. They favor democracy in theory but in practice they seem to favor oligarchy. Certainly that’s the case on this issue. Medical advances make the current law of mockery of justice and human rights. With the advent of 4D ultrasound, that has become apparent to an increasingly large segment of the population, most especially the young who are more pro-life than their parents were. If and when Roe is overturned, abortion will still be legal in most states. But purely as a matter of principle, it’s future should be in the hands of the people not a handful of judges. verumserum.com

To: Greg or e who wrote (76984)	1/26/2010 11:52:43 AM
From: Sully-	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

Whose Business Is It? IBD Editorials Posted 01/25/2010 07:02 PM ET Politics: During last year's presidential campaign, Democrats blasted "sweetheart deals" for companies like Halliburton and vowed to end no-bid contracts. Now the Democrats' political donors are reaping them. Monday, Fox News found that Checchi & Company Consulting was awarded a $24,673,427 no-bid contract for "rule of law stabilization services" inside Afghanistan. And by coincidence, its president, Vincent Checchi, donated $8,350 to Obama's campaign, according to opensecrets.org. Supposedly, Checchi will train the "next generation of legal professionals" and develop the capacity of Afghanistan's justice system "to be accessible, reliable and fair." None of those things describe the contract process Checchi is operating from. The U.S. Agency for International Development and other government agencies award contracts on a bid basis, making exceptions only if there's a singular good or service only one company can provide. The exceptions are designated IQC — indefinite quantity contract. In 2002, Halliburton was awarded a renewal of a no-bid contract on this basis in Iraq because no other company could do the specialized firefighting work at oil wells that was needed. The left, steeped in irrational hatred of Vice President Dick Cheney, who once ran Halliburton, howled the deal was corrupt, but ignored that no one else could do the work. They also missed that it was President Bill Clinton who signed off on the original Halliburton contract. The Bush administration merely renewed it. It's a far cry from the aid scene in Afghanistan these days. Unlike Halliburton, which does something others can't, Checchi is just one of many aid groups that can do the vaguely defined work of democracy-building. Yet, it has the same "IQC" designation. Shut out by a no-bid contract, rival contractors told Fox it's a corrupted process that will only institutionalize the aid rackets of Afghanistan and delay the work of real democracy-building. It may also lead to cost-overruns and the shutting out of qualified people — all for political reasons. "Why do you think there's a constitutional crisis in Iraq?" asked Maggie Petito, president of Friends of Rule of Law in Ecuador, who's familiar with USAID contracting. "These no-bid contracts exclude competition and wrongly deprive the U.S. of what should be vibrant, competitive services to foreign governments." If Afghanistan weren't so important it might be written off as just Chicago politics as usual. But there's a war that must be won and few signs from the White House of what it wants to achieve. Instead of winning the war, President Obama seems to be using Afghanistan to reward his political cronies. investors.com

To: Greg or e who wrote (76984)	1/27/2010 5:35:22 PM
From: average joe	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

"Never mind the vicious nonsense of claiming that an embryo has a “right to life.” A piece of protoplasm has no rights—and no life in the human sense of the term. One may argue about the later stages of a pregnancy, but the essential issue concerns only the first three months. To equate a potential with an actual, is vicious; to advocate the sacrifice of the latter to the former, is unspeakable. . . . Observe that by ascribing rights to the unborn, i.e., the nonliving, the anti-abortionists obliterate the rights of the living: the right of young people to set the course of their own lives. The task of raising a child is a tremendous, lifelong responsibility, which no one should undertake unwittingly or unwillingly. Procreation is not a duty: human beings are not stock-farm animals. For conscientious persons, an unwanted pregnancy is a disaster; to oppose its termination is to advocate sacrifice, not for the sake of anyone’s benefit, but for the sake of misery qua misery, for the sake of forbidding happiness and fulfillment to living human beings." Ayn Rand