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.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: John Chen who wrote (305013)	3/24/2011 1:05:20 PM
From: joseffy	Respond to of 306849

Obama is keeping his peace prize A noble defense By MJ LEE \| 03/23/11 politico.com Obama poses with his medal and diploma at the Nobel Peace Prize ceremony in Oslo. AP Photo President Obama defended his Nobel Peace Prize on Tuesday, saying that Americans “don’t see any contradiction” in him [NOTICE INCOMPETENT POLITICO WRITER USING "him" INSTEAD of the proper "his"--and WITH NO POLITICO EDITOR COMPETENT ENOUGH TO SEE THAT] ordering an attack on Libya to make sure “people aren’t butchered because of a dictator who wants to cling to power.” “When I received that award, I specifically said there was an irony because I was already dealing with two wars,” Obama said in an interview with CNN from El Salvador. “So I am accustomed to this contradiction of being both a commander-in-chief but also someone who aspires to peace.” Saying he is focused on ensuring that Libyans can “live out their own aspirations,” Obama defended America’s involvement in Libya, saying, “we’re not invading a country, we’re not acting alone – we’re acting under a mandate issued by the United Nations Security Council in an unprecedented fashion and with unprecedented speed.” And he said again that the U.S. military has already saved lives there. “I think the American people don’t see any contradiction in somebody who cares about peace also wanting to make sure that people aren’t butchered because of a dictator who wants to cling to power,” he said. Some foreign leaders have called on Obama to return the Nobel Peace Prize he accepted in 2009 since ordering the Libya attack.

To: John Chen who wrote (305013)	3/24/2011 1:07:43 PM
From: joseffy	Respond to of 306849

The Destruction of Detroit youtube.com

To: John Chen who wrote (305013)	3/25/2011 1:10:44 PM
From: joseffy	Respond to of 306849

Napolitano: Mexican Border Violence A Mistaken “Perception” . Judicial Watch ^ \| March 25, 2011 judicialwatch.org There are no dead bodies in this picture newsjunkiepost.com Violence along the Mexican border is merely a mistaken “perception” because the area is better now than it ever has been thanks to the Obama Administration’s commitment to “fostering a secure and prosperous” region. So says Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano who is beginning to sound like a desperate salesperson pushing a cheap product no one believes in. Napolitano’s latest pitch came this week at a port of entry in El Paso called the Bridge of the Americas. Joined by a group of local business leaders and politicians, Napolitano jubilantly declared that the area is safe and “open for business.” Unfortunately, “misinformation about safety” is negatively impacting border communities by driving visitors away and hurting local businesses, Napolitano says. None of this is true, according to Madame Secretary who assures that “some of America’s safest communities are in the Southwest border region…” In fact, border city crime rates have remained steady or dropped over the past decade, Napolitano points out. The reality is that Mexican drug-cartel violence has reached epic proportions and routinely spills into the very towns Napolitano promotes as “America’s safest communities.” Federal agents have come under siege by heavily armed drug smugglers and local media has exposed record levels in crimes associated with illicit narcotics operations. In fact, more than 13,000 people were murdered across Mexico last year in disturbing and cruel ways not previously seen. Ironically, Mexico’s most violent region (Ciudad Juarez) borders El Paso, the very place Napolitano chose to deliver this week’s rosy assessment. Last fall a myriad of bullets fired into El Paso, striking City Hall and a public university building. The local sheriff says the gun battles are breaking out everywhere but his hands are tied because he’s legally forbidden from intervening in another country’s war. The disturbing incident inspired Texas’s Attorney General to send President Obama a letter saying his state is under constant assault from illegal activity threatening a porous border. About a month later, amid escalating violence, Napolitano declared that the Mexican border “is as secure as it has ever been.” The famous words, ridiculed in the press worldwide, came days after U.S. Border Patrol agents engaged in a violent gunshot battle with Mexican drug smugglers along the Rio Grande in Texas. The federal officers came under siege during a bust that netted half a ton of U.S.-bound marijuana.

To: John Chen who wrote (305013)	3/29/2011 10:12:11 AM
From: joseffy	Respond to of 306849

The Op-Ed that Governor Walker wrote that the New York Times chose not to run: March 29, 2011 wisgov.state.wi.us The One Opinion Piece the New York Times Didn’t Want You to Read In the weeks since Governor Walker introduced his reforms to balance the budget and protect middle-class taxpayers the New York Times has repeatedly used its editorial pages to opine on the reforms. All told there have been at least seven editorials, op-eds or columns in the paper about the Wisconsin reforms. Below is the Op-Ed that Governor Walker wrote that the New York Times chose not to run: ________________________________________________________ In nearly every state across America, Governors are facing major budget deficits. Many, Democrat and Republican alike, are cutting state aid to schools and other local governments - which will force massive layoffs, massive property tax increases or both. In Wisconsin, we are doing something progressive in the best sense of the word. We are implementing reforms to protect middle class jobs and middle class taxpayers. While our idea may be a bold political move it is a very modest request of our employees. We are reforming the bargaining system so our state and local governments can ask employees to contribute 5.8% for pension and 12.6% for health insurance premiums. These reforms will help them balance their budgets. In total, our reforms save local governments more than $700 million each year. Most workers outside of government would love our proposal. Over the past several months, I have visited numerous factories and small businesses across Wisconsin. On these tours, workers tell me that they pay anywhere from 15% to 50% of their health insurance premium costs. The average middle class worker is paying more than 20% of his or her premium. Even federal employees pay more than twice what we are asking state and local government workers to pay and most of them don’t have collective bargaining for wages or benefits. These facts beg the question as to why the protesters are in Wisconsin and not in Washington, D.C. By nearly any measure, our requests are quite reasonable. Beyond helping to balance current and future budgets, our reforms will improve the quality of our governments. No longer will hiring and firing be done solely based on seniority and union contracts. Instead, schools - as well as state and local governments - will be able to make decisions based on merit and performance. This concept works well in Indiana. In 2005, Governor Mitch Daniels reformed collective bargaining. In turn, the government got more efficient, more effective and more accountable to the public. Governor Daniels even encouraged employees to come forward with ways to save taxpayer dollars and they responded. Eventually, the state was able to reward top performing employees. This is true reform – making government work for the people. A recent columnist on these pages opined that “common problems deserve common solutions” suggesting that Republicans and Democrats work together. In principle, that is a good idea. Since January 3rd, we passed some of the most aggressive economic development legislation in the country. And on nearly every measure, many Democrats joined with all of the Republicans and an Independent to vote in favor of the various pieces of legislation. The Wisconsin legislature recognized that we are growing, not Republican or Democratic jobs, but Wisconsin jobs. Together, we worked to show that Wisconsin is open for business. But sometimes, bi-partisanship is not so good. During several of the past budgets, members of both political parties raided segregated funds, used questionable accounting principles and deferred tough decisions. This, along with the use of billions of dollars worth of one-time federal stimulus money for the budget two years ago, left Wisconsin with the current $3.6 billion deficit. ur reforms allow us to take a new and better approach. Instead of avoiding the hard decisions and searching for short-term solutions, we make a commitment to the future. The choices we are making now in Wisconsin will make sure our children are not left picking up the pieces of the broken state budget left behind. Our reforms create the lowest structural deficit in recent history ensuring our budget is stable for decades to come. These changes will give businesses the confidence they need to grow and invest in our state. We live in the greatest nation on earth because for more than 200 years we’ve had leaders who cared more about their children and grandchildren than themselves. Having the courage to make decisions in the best interest of the next generation – despite external pressures – is a concept that America has always admired, but is forgetting today. My hope is that Wisconsin will remind the nation what makes our country great.