SI
SI
discoversearch

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 (99990)2/16/2011 9:24:42 AM
From: TideGlider3 Recommendations  Respond to of 224728
 
Nothing stops you from sending more money to the IRS. Every bit you send can help politicians spend more. Keep that in mind and do the right thing Kenneth.



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (99990)2/16/2011 9:25:28 AM
From: TideGlider2 Recommendations  Respond to of 224728
 
Have you ever sent in extra cash to the IRS?



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (99990)2/16/2011 9:27:50 AM
From: chartseer3 Recommendations  Respond to of 224728
 
March 12th is the Day Of Rage in Washington DC will you be there?
Will the youths ask for Barry's resignation?
Will tea partiers join them?
Will the young people stay there until their demands are met?
Are we witnessing a new type of government where the unruly minority rule?
"Day of rage"? That rings with familiarity! Seem I heard that phrase in the past. Maybe in the sixties. Maybe in Chicago?
Are most of the stupid Americans aware that Chicago radicals have emerged as the leading force in the nation and maybe the world?

en.wikipedia.org

citizen chartseer



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (99990)2/16/2011 9:42:00 AM
From: chartseer3 Recommendations  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 224728
 
When the Dumasrats regained control of both houses of congress and the white house why didn't they repeal the Bush tax cuts? They had no problem increasing spending.

citizen chartseer



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (99990)2/16/2011 11:15:25 AM
From: lorne1 Recommendation  Respond to of 224728
 
ken..obama's mentor/boss/owner whatever at play.

Soros team wants al-Qaida in government
Told Algerian officials those supporting Islamic caliphate should be 'empowered'
February 15, 2011
By Aaron Klein
© 2011 WorldNetDaily
wnd.com

JERUSALEM – An international "crisis management" group led by billionaire George Soros long has petitioned for the Algerian government to cease "excessive" military activities against al-Qaida-linked groups and to allow organizations seeking to create an Islamic state to participate in the Algerian government.

The organization, the International Crisis Group, also is tied strongly to the Egyptian opposition movement whose protests led to the ouster of President Hosni Mubarak.

Soros' own Open Society Institute has funded opposition groups across the Middle East and North Africa, including organizations involved in the current chaos.

Following protests that led to the resignations of Mubarak and Tunisian President Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali – both key U.S. allies – Algeria similarly has been engulfed in anti-regime riots.

Algerian President Abdelaziz Bouteflika has ruled the country with a tough hand. And he has been an ally of the U.S. in fighting al-Qaida.

Islamist parties serve as Bouteflika's main opposition.

Yesterday, Algerian Minister of Foreign Affairs Mourad Medelci said his country may lift a 19-year-old state of emergency in the next few days, indicating the country may be ready for reforms leading to a more representative democracy.

The National Coordination for Change and Democracy, one of the initiators of the recent Algerian protests, demanded an immediate shift to full democracy, the lifting the state of emergency laws, as well as "labor and social justice and liberation in political and media fields."

Algerian Islamic groups have joined in the protest coordination, including the outlawed Islamic Salvation Front and its leader, Ali Belhadj.

The International Crisis Group, or ICG, which includes Soros among its eight executive committee members, long has petitioned for the reformation of the Algerian government and for the inclusion of Islamist political parties, two groups that seek to turn Algeria into an Islamic state.

In a July 2004 ICG report obtained by WND, the ICG calls on the Algerian government to curb military action against al-Qaida-affiliated organizations, particularly the Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat, GSPC, which, like the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, aims to establish an Islamic state within Algeria, and an armed Islamic terrorist group known as Houmat Daawa Salafia, or HDS.

Soros' ICG names the two Islamic groups in its recommendations to the Algerian government.

"Give top priority to ending the remaining armed movements, mainly the GSPC and HDS, through a political, security, legal and diplomatic strategy," states the ICG report.

"Avoid excessive reliance on military means and do not allow these movements' purported links to al-Qaida to rule out a negotiated end to their campaigns," continued the ICG's recommendation to the Algerian government.

The ICG has issued at least six other reports recommending Algeria transition to a democracy that will allow the participation of the Islamic groups seeking to create a Muslim caliphate.

After Algeria's president, Bouteflika, won more than 80 percent of the vote against Islamic opposition groups in 2004, Robert Malley, an ICG associate, recommended, "Rather than exclude all his opponents from the policy making process, he could empower them."

The ICG's Malley is a former adviser to Obama during the 2008 presidential campaign. He resigned after it was exposed he had communicated with Hamas. WND reported Malley long had petitioned for dialogue with Hamas.

WND also reported previously the ICG also has petitioned for the Egyptian government to normalize ties with the Muslim Brotherhood and includes on its board Egyptian opposition leader Mohamed ElBaradei, as well as other personalities who champion dialogue with Hamas, a violent offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood.

The ICG also released a report urging the Egyptian regime to allow the Brotherhood to establish an Islamist political party.

In a June 2008 report entitled, "Egypt's Muslim Brothers Confrontation or Integration," Soros' ICG urges the Egyptian regime to allow the group to participate in political life.

The report dismisses Egypt's longstanding government crackdown on the Muslim Brotherhood as "dangerously short-sighted."

The ICG report called on Mubarak's regime to "pave the way for the regularization of the Muslim Brothers' participation in political life," including by allowing for the "establishment of a political party with religious reference."

The ICG specifically stressed allowing the Brotherhood to serve as an Islamist party several times in its 2008 report.

The ICG and its personalities also long have petitioned for the Muslim Brotherhood to be allowed to join the Egyptian government.

ElBaradei suspended his board membership in the ICG two weeks ago, after he returned to Egypt to lead the anti-Mubarak protests.

U.S. board members include Zbigniew Brzezinski, who was national security adviser to Jimmy Carter; Samuel Berger, who was Bill Clinton's national security adviser; and retired U.S. ambassador Thomas Pickering, who made headlines in 2009 after meeting with Hamas leaders and calling for the U.S. to open ties to the Islamist group.

Another ICG member is Malley.

The ICG defines itself as an "independent, non-profit, multinational organization, with 100 staff members on five continents, working through field-based analysis and high-level advocacy to prevent and resolve deadly conflict."

Meanwhile, Soros also has other ties to opposition groups in the Middle East.

His Open Society Institute's Middle East and North Africa Initiative has provided numerous grants to a wide range of projects that promote so-called democratic issues across the region, including in Egypt, where the Muslim Brotherhood stands to gain from any future election.

Soros' Open Society also funded the main opposition voice in Tunisia, Radio Kalima, which championed the riots there that led to the ouster of President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali.

In September, Soros' group was looking to expand its operations in Egypt by hiring a new project manager for its Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights, which is run in partnership with the Open Society Justice Initiative. The group is seeking to develop a national network of legal empowerment actors for referral of public-interest law cases. Such organizations in the past have helped represent Muslim Brotherhood leaders seeking election or more authority in the country.

Soros himself earlier this month made public statements in support of the protests in Egypt, which the Mubarak government has warned will result in the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood in the country.

In a Washington Post editorial entitled, "Why Obama Has to Get Egypt Right," Soros recognized that if free elections were held in Egypt, "the Brotherhood is bound to emerge as a major political force, though it is far from assured of a majority."

He stated the U.S. has "much to gain by moving out in front and siding with the public demand for dignity and democracy" in Egypt.

He claimed the "Muslim Brotherhood's cooperation with Mohamed ElBaradei … is a hopeful sign that it intends to play a constructive role in a democratic political system."

Soros did not mention his ties to ElBaradei.

Soros did, however, single out Israel as "the main stumbling block" in paving the way toward transition in the Middle East.

"In reality, Israel has as much to gain from the spread of democracy in the Middle East as the United States has. But Israel is unlikely to recognize its own best interests because the change is too sudden and carries too many risks," he wrote.



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (99990)2/16/2011 11:18:14 AM
From: lorne2 Recommendations  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 224728
 
kenny...those darn pesky laws that republicans honor...why cant they just be like democrat/liberals and ignore the law.

Republicans Rebuke Effort to Defund Health Care Law
by Chad Pergram
| February 15, 2011
politics.blogs.foxnews.com


House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and defenders of the health care reform law unearthed an unexpected and temporary ally Monday night: Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC).

Politics makes strange bedfellows. But few bunking arrangements are stranger than this.

To be clear, there aren't many in Congress who have more antipathy for the health care law than Foxx. In fact, at a meeting of the House Rules Committee Monday night, Foxx could barely hide her contempt for the health law.

"It is an abomination that this bill was passed," scoffed Foxx.

But for a few moments, Foxx, and all seven of her Republican colleagues on the Rules Committee formed a short-term vanguard to preserve the touchstone of the Democrats' legislative agenda last year.

Here's what's going on:

On Tuesday, the House plans to debate a bill to fund the government through September. Republicans aim to use the measure to pare at least $100 billion in spending out of this year's budget.

There is no provision more onerous to conservatives than the health law. So if the GOP is set to cut spending, why not shave the money set aside to implement the health law, too?

Rep. Steve King (R-IA) planned to do just that, which would in turn cripple all government operations devoted to executing the health law. In other words, if there's no money, the government can't carry out the policy.

And that's when King ran into a buzz saw run by Virginia Foxx and the rest of the Republicans on the House Rules Committee.

All of those Republicans want to upend the health care law just as much as King does. But not at the expense of corrupting House rules that govern how to handle the spending measure on the floor.

House rules prohibit lawmakers from "legislating" on a spending bill, such as curbing funds for health care. And in order for King to get his way, the Rules Committee would have to "protect" King's amendment and give it "special treatment" when GOP leaders summoned the spending resolution to the floor Tuesday.

Foxx and her GOP colleagues weren't about to break the rules just to stuff the health care law.

"You are asking us to change the rules here in the Rules Committee," lectured Foxx when King implored the panel to grant a wavier to his amendment. "What that does is open us up to the same accusations that were made of our colleagues across the aisle over the last four years in terms of them not being fair to us."

"Abuse of process" was one of the GOP's biggest grievances with how Democrats ran the House. Republicans blasted Democrats for altering bills late at night without getting ample time to consider changes and accused their counterparts of trying to "bend the rules" to pass controversial measures.

"We did not want to behave as the Democrats did," said Foxx in a Monday night interview. "We don't like having to tell a Republican member no on an issue."

So Republicans faced a conundrum: go for the big win and trash the health care law or face the same criticisms they leveled at Democrats.

Try as he might, King couldn't find a sympathetic ear among Rules Committee Republicans.

"Please, please, please, don't do this," said freshman Rep. Tim Scott (R-SC) to King. "But we will find a way to accomplish this."

Freshman Rep. Daniel Webster (R-FL) was circumspect.

"Thanks for your courage," Webster said to King. "It takes courage to stand alone."

Rep. Jim McGovern (D-MA) watched each of King's GOP colleagues rebuke him from the other side of the Rules Committee dais. McGovern later mused that "this has been one of the most fascinating discussions I've witnessed in this committee."

But King would certainly find no compassion from McGovern.

"I think you're being told in a very polite way, ‘no,'" McGovern told King. "There are eight of them (Republicans) and only four of us (Democrats). So I can't help you."

So the irony? On Tuesday, the Republican-controlled House will consider dozens of amendments to either restore certain programs or perhaps cut even deeper. But King's plan won't be in order, even though almost every Republican in the joint wishes it could be.

Still, all is not lost for health care reform opponents. Rep. Denny Rehberg (R-MT) is trying to artfully draft an amendment which could strip the health law of its coffers. But prospects for Rehberg's effort remain murky as he is still awaiting a cost analysis from the Congressional Budget Office.

Furthermore, while Republicans structured the debate of the spending bill to allow an "unlimited" number of amendments, offering an amendment could prove complicated.

On Tuesday afternoon, a House reading clerk will begin reciting all 359 pages of the spending bill. And if lawmakers are on their game, they can offer amendments, so long as it pertains to the section of the bill that the clerk is reading. In fact, lawmakers have to present each amendment nearly the precise clause, sentence, comma, jot and tittle where it is relevant to the bill. Otherwise, the House will disallow it. This process could take hours as Tuesday's session is expected to bleed deep into the night. And this exercise is scheduled to run through Thursday.

"Buckle your seatbelts," warned House Rules Committee Chairman David Dreier (R-CA) of what to expect on the floor over the next few days.

It's anybody's guess whether Republicans like King or Rehberg will find a way to strip the health law of funding. But the law's most ardent defenders can rest easier for at least another day.

"We didn't do the health care bill because we were masochists or I wanted someone to throw a brick through my window or threaten my life," said Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY).

Which proves one thing. Democrats like Slaughter know how tough it was to pass the health care law in 2009 and 2010.

And now Republicans like King are learning how tough it is to undo it.



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (99990)2/16/2011 11:44:52 AM
From: TideGlider  Respond to of 224728
 
nationalreview.com

NYU Accepts Rosen’s Resignation
February 16, 2011 10:21 A.M.
By Jim Geraghty

Just arriving from NYU:

From Karen J. Greenberg, Executive Director, Center on Law and Security

Nir Rosen is always provocative, but he crossed the line yesterday with his comments about Lara Logan. I am deeply distressed by what he wrote about Ms. Logan and strongly denounce his comments. They were cruel and insensitive and completely unacceptable. Mr. Rosen tells me that he misunderstood the severity of the attack on her in Cairo. He has apologized, withdrawn his remarks, and submitted his resignation as a fellow, which I have accepted. However, this in no way compensates for the harm his comments have inflicted. We are all horrified by what happened to Ms. Logan, and our thoughts are with her during this difficult time.

Yesterday, I predicted, with some cynicism, some sweeping of this under the rug, so I applaud NYU’s Center on Law and Security for taking this seriously. I believe in the First Amendment and the need to forgive the occasional stupid, thoughtless, or insensitive comment; everyone makes one sooner or later. But there was some something profoundly disturbing in Rosen’s complete inability to sympathize with the awful ordeal of Ms. Logan and the fact that when others recoiled at his comments, he kept digging in deeper.



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (99990)2/16/2011 11:53:54 AM
From: grusum3 Recommendations  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 224728
 
I didn't blame all spending on Bush but I did blame his tax cuts for the huge deficits.

i see you've already got 7 replies to your claptrap, but i'll still add mine. tax cuts don't 'cause' deficits. spending does. revenue from taxes is limited. spending is not limited by anything but conscience.



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (99990)2/16/2011 1:44:48 PM
From: chartseer3 Recommendations  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 224728
 
How can you cut spending when politicians want to use spending to buy votes? Cutting spending would cut votes. You can't have that.

citizen chartseer