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 : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Knighty Tin who wrote (127689)	4/29/2011 3:21:42 PM
From: BSGrinder	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 132070

This is amazing stuff! I'd never heard of her before, but this is impressive: Within hours of Land's decision, Taitz told the news site Talking Points Memo that she felt Land's refusal to hear her case was an act of treason.[32] Two days later, she filed a motion to stay Rhodes' deployment pending rehearing of the dismissal order. She repeated her treason allegations against Land and made several other intemperate statements, including claims that Land was aiding and abetting purported aspirations of "dictatorship" by Obama.[33] Land rejected the motion as frivolous and ordered her to show cause why she should not be fined $10,000 for abuse of judicial process.[34] A few hours later, a letter bearing Rhodes's signature arrived, stating that Taitz filed the motion without her knowledge or consent, asking Land to remove Taitz as her attorney of record in the case, and stating that it was her "plan to file a complaint with the California State Bar due to [Taitz's] reprehensible and unprofessional actions". Within hours of Land's decision, Taitz told the news site Talking Points Memo that she felt Land's refusal to hear her case was an act of treason.[32] Two days later, she filed a motion to stay Rhodes' deployment pending rehearing of the dismissal order. She repeated her treason allegations against Land and made several other intemperate statements, including claims that Land was aiding and abetting purported aspirations of "dictatorship" by Obama.[33] Land rejected the motion as frivolous and ordered her to show cause why she should not be fined $10,000 for abuse of judicial process.[34] On October 13, 2009, Judge Clay Land ordered "Counsel Orly Taitz ... to pay $20,000 to the United States, through the Middle District of Georgia Clerk's Office, within thirty days of the date of this Order as a sanction for her misconduct in violation of Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure." Land's decision stated: The Court finds that counsel's conduct was willful and not merely negligent. It demonstrates bad faith on her part. As an attorney, she is deemed to have known better. She owed a duty to follow the rules and to respect the Court. Counsel's pattern of conduct conclusively establishes that she did not mistakenly violate a provision of law. She knowingly violated Rule 11. Her response to the Court's show cause order is breathtaking in its arrogance and borders on delusional. She expresses no contrition or regret regarding her misconduct. To the contrary, she continues her baseless attacks on the Court. Upon learning of Land's ruling, Taitz said she would appeal the sanction, declaring that Judge Land was "scared to go against the regime" of the "oppressive" Obama administration, and that the sanction was an attempt to "intimidate" her.[38] On March 15, 2010, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the sanctions against Taitz, ordering her to pay the $20,000 fine.[39] In July 2010, Taitz applied to the U.S. Supreme Court to stay the enforcement of sanctions, arguing that "allowing sanctions by judge Land to stand, will signify beginning of tyranny in the United States of America and end to the Constitutional Republic which is the foundation of this nation".[40] The application was submitted to Justice Thomas on July 8 and denied by him on July 15.[41][42] Doubting that Justice Thomas signed the denial order, Taitz claimed to have requested of Chief Justice Roberts that Thomas's signature be presented to her for verification. And then to top it all off: Taitz was defeated by Dunn in the June 8 primary by a margin of about three to one,[53] losing by over 900,000 votes.[54] On June 17, 2010, Taitz filed a lawsuit in the Orange County Superior Court contesting the election results, again alleging Dunn's ineligibility.[55] On March 17, 2011, the judge ruled against Taitz. She must be about zero for twenty three! She sounds like one of the most willfully ignorant obstructionists on the planet! /K

To: Knighty Tin who wrote (127689)	4/29/2011 6:12:30 PM
From: Broken_Clock	Respond to of 132070

Weekend Edition April 29 - May 1, 2011 Time to Break Out How Obama and Trump Imprison Voters By SAM HUSSEINI A group of demonstrators recently got into an Obama fundraiser to protest the imprisonment of Bradley Manning, the alleged source of the WikiLeaks cables. They sang a song to Obama. Part of it went: "We'll vote for you in 2012, yes that's true / Look at the Republicans -- what else can we do?" Manning is not the only one who is in prison. These protesters have confined themselves. Or rather, they have allowed the political establishment to imprison them. They are attempting to pressure Obama, while saying outright -- as they are giving him money -- that they don't think they have any other choice but to back him. Not exactly negotiating from a position of strength. And some have mocked them. But, really, what is their choice? How can they emancipate themselves? Look at what is happening on the Republican side. Donald Trump told the Conservative Political Action Conference earlier this year: "Ron Paul cannot get elected." This statement tries to undermine and dismiss Paul's candidacy. Trump's vision of democracy is apparently one where the result is known before the election. The Democratic establishment has relentlessly penned in Principled Progressives while the Republican establishment has continuously made captives out of Conscientious Conservatives. And these establishments have succeeded time and time again. This is particularly tragic because most Principled Progressives and Conscientious Conservatives agree on so much, though it might not seem that way because establishment politicians (and corporate media) dwell on the differences between each other, which are frequently trivial. Consider: • Foreign policy: Cutting the military budget, ending the U.S.'s wars, dismantling the network of military bases around the globe, stopping support for tyrannical governments like Saudi Arabia, ending support of Israel's aggressions and occupations. • Economy: Stopping the Wall Street bailouts, ending the Federal Reserve, curtailing runaway corporate power and corporate welfare, ending trade deals like NAFTA that obliterate jobs in the U.S. while impoverishing many in other countries, challenging the IMF and WTO. • Freedom Agenda: Ending the so-called "Patriot" Act, stopping government use of secret "evidence" to prosecute individuals, insisting on accountability for torture and illegal detentions and renditions, stopping government spying on citizens, ending the drug war and the mass imprisonment that causes, and challenging the media establishment while enhancing solutions like local low power radio and net neutrality. Oh yeah, and supporting WikiLeaks and whilstleblowers like Bradley Manning. But Big Media keep telling progressives they're supposed to hate "The Tea Party" -- as if there were no difference between Sarah Palin and Ron Paul. And the establishment and corporate media have kept conservatives from seeing the insights of authentic progressives, people like Dennis Kucinich, Ralph Nader, Cynthia McKinney and Mike Gravel -- demonizing or marginalizing them in a plethora of ways. So yes, singing protesters: Look good and hard at the Republicans and realize, that on virtually all the issues above, it's the Principled Progressives and Conscientious Conservatives together on one side and the Establishment Center -- Obama, the Bushs, the Clintons, Palin, Dick Cheney, John Boehner, Harry Reid, Donald Trump, Mitt Romney -- on the other. What we have is close to a classic prisoner's dilemma: If Conscientious Conservatives and Principled Progressives can find ways to dialogue and cooperate, they might develop strategies to win on all those issues listed above and then some. If they don't, they will likely continue to be shut out and locked down, forever in bondage to the corporate establishment. Who you've been lead to believe is your enemy -- your political opposite number -- is actually your ticket to political emancipation. What we need is the meaningful emergence of a New Center based on principle and conscience. Will there be disagreements? Yes, but with work, they will be honest ones, not endless political hackery. Manning may be in jail, but in a deeper sense, he's free. He acted on his conscience. We all need to free ourselves -- and our votes -- from of the partisan boxes the establishment keeps confining us to. Sam Husseini is founder of VotePact.org, which advocates that would-be Democrat and would-be Republican voters pair up and vote for candidates they actually agree with. His personal blog is at husseini.posterous.com