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 (84320)	5/20/2010 12:33:56 PM
From: tonto	5 Recommendations Respond to of 224729

Toxic Obama stayed away and was told to stay away...

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (84320)	5/20/2010 12:54:58 PM
From: JakeStraw	7 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224729

Partisan dinosaurs like you Kenneth are heading for extinction. American taxpayers expect their public officials to work for them and in their best interests. We want accountability, transparency and fiscal responsibility. Something this current administration has shown none of! It's time for government to learn we are fed up!!

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (84320)	5/20/2010 1:00:59 PM
From: Hope Praytochange	1 Recommendation Respond to of 224729

The New York Times in its reporting uncovered Mr. Blumenthal's long and well established pattern of misleading his constituents about his Vietnam War service, which he acknowledged in an interview with The Times. Mr. Blumenthal needs to be candid with his constituents about whether he went to Vietnam or not, since his official military records clearly indicate he did not. The video doesn't change our story. Saying that he served "during Vietnam" doesn't indicate one way or the other whether he went to Vietnam. I agree that Blumenthal getting the quote right earlier in the speech doesn't change the fact that he misled about his service later in that same speech. And it's true that The Times uncovered other examples of Blumenthal appearing to mislead about his service, or at least not doing anything to correct misimpressions about it. But the 2008 speech is by far the single most damning piece of evidence against Blumenthal. The other quotes are just not quite as conclusive. And the fact that he got it right, if narrowly so, earlier in the speech raises at least the possibility that he didn't intend to mislead later on, even if it doesn't prove this one way or the other. Even if you don't believe the longer video is exculpatory in any way, as The Times says, there's no conceivable reason for leaving out the fuller context and letting readers make the call for themselves. It seems obvious that when dealing with a story this explosive, you would want to err on the side of more context, rather than less.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (84320)	5/20/2010 1:08:58 PM
From: tonto	5 Recommendations Respond to of 224729

Wrong. Here is the real reason why Specter lost... What led to Specter's getting re-JEC-ted By WILL BUNCH Philadelphia Daily News bunchw@phillynews.com 215-854-2957 IT TOOK MONTHS for staffers at Philadelphia's top political-consulting shop, the Campaign Group, to find exactly the right TV clip they wanted of Sen. Arlen Specter explaining why he was switching to the Democratic Party. It took about five seconds for the firm's founder, local political-ad guru Neil Oxman, to take the spot - the cornerstone of Rep. Joe Sestak's successful campaign to oust Specter - and make it perfect. It was as soon as Oxman heard the short clip of Specter explaining his party switch outside of 30th Street Station on the day it happened - April 28, 2009 - and the affected, grating way Specter said it was so that he could be "re-e-LECT-ed." philly.com

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (84320)	5/20/2010 1:27:30 PM
From: chartseer	2 Recommendations Respond to of 224729

Oh bummer! Are you saying bush trumps bamah? Bamah said he loves specter. I saw that in specters ads. The local paper says critz beat burns because he was to the right of burns. I am not a bush fan. Bush lost me when he prohibited the marines from attacking faluja where the terrorist were trapped until after election day. bush didn't want the casualties until after election day. After election day and the marines attacked most of the enemy had already escaped. How could anybody reelect this person is beyond me. You send them over to risk their lives and then you interfere with their actions just because of an election? Not in my book! Don't worry! Be happy! the hopeless comrade chartseer in the new era of politicians