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 : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: coug who wrote (84862)	1/26/2011 1:26:15 PM
From: longnshort	Respond to of 89467

No people of color have been nominated for an Oscar this year. Hollywood is so racist

To: coug who wrote (84862)	1/26/2011 1:41:23 PM
From: longnshort	Respond to of 89467

Best line about the SOTU: ..... If I close my eyes and ask what the president outlined this evening, I get visions of 100,000 new (and unionized) engineering and science teachers criss-crossing rural America in windmill-powered, solar-paneled high-speed trains — questing after the three doctors who will still be in private practice once ObamaCare really takes hold. .... pajamasmedia.com

To: coug who wrote (84862)	1/26/2011 2:07:35 PM
From: longnshort	Respond to of 89467

White House Backs Off of Obama Earmarks Pledge from Cato-at-liberty by Jim Harper By Jim Harper In the state of the union speech last night, President Obama said with great force: [I]f a bill comes to my desk with earmarks inside, I will veto it. This appeared to settle the earmark question once and for all. The Republican House and Republicans in the Senate had already sworn off earmarks. Senate Democrats, who may have been holding out hope for preserving this prerogative, will not get to do earmarks. So says the president of the United States, veto pen in hand. But late last night the White House may have begun to modify the president's pledge. A "government reform factsheet" circulated by White House staff says, "The President intends to veto bills with special interest earmarks." (emphasis added) This appears to create a class of earmarks that will bring the president's veto, special interest earmarks, and a class that will not—national interest earmarks, one supposes. Defining what is an "earmark" is difficult, though not impossible, as the groups that have worked on the earmarking problem can tell you. But the distinction between "special interest earmarks" and "national interest earmarks" appears to be something the president would make for himself. This withdraws a great deal of force from the "no earmarks" pledge. It's certainly possible that the "special interest" language in the fact sheet is surplussage simply meant to illustrate that earmarks are a "special interest" problem. But we will have to watch and see whether the president walks away from his statements about controlling earmarks, as he has done before.