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 (113120)	9/17/2011 10:09:25 AM
From: Sedohr Nod	4 Recommendations Respond to of 224756

Tide wants to shop and compare.....that's the preference for most sensible folks.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (113120)	9/17/2011 10:41:24 AM
From: longnshort	3 Recommendations Respond to of 224756

Steven Crowder has been given an investment opportunity that he isn't sure about. By calling the SEC help line, and using their on-line criteria for a Ponzi Scheme, he determines this Social Security thing might not be everything it promises. Crowder Reports Ponzi Scheme To SEC

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (113120)	9/17/2011 10:46:45 AM
From: longnshort	2 Recommendations Respond to of 224756

Ponzi Schemes ? Frequently Asked Questions FBI's video on Ponzi schemes What is a Ponzi scheme? Why do Ponzi schemes collapse? How did Ponzi schemes get their name? Does the SEC investigate Ponzi schemes? Who is Bernie Madoff? How is the SEC responding to its Office of Inspector General?s reports on the Madoff fraud? What are some Ponzi scheme ?red flags?? What steps can I take to avoid Ponzi schemes and other investment frauds? What are some of the similarities and differences between Ponzi and pyramid schemes? What is a Ponzi scheme? A Ponzi scheme is an investment fraud that involves the payment of purported returns to existing investors from funds contributed by new investors. Ponzi scheme organizers often solicit new investors by promising to invest funds in opportunities claimed to generate high returns with little or no risk. In many Ponzi schemes, the fraudsters focus on attracting new money to make promised payments to earlier-stage investors and to use for personal expenses, instead of engaging in any legitimate investment activity. this is from the SEC web site

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (113120)	9/17/2011 10:49:29 AM
From: locogringo	7 Recommendations Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 224756

TG, only you care about Obama's grades I care about his grades, too, kenny_troll. He doesn't have any grades, from elementary school, high school, colleges, law school............NUTTIN! What has he published? Any papers? (not the books by Ayers.......please!) Did he write anything in college or law school? Did he ever teach a class? Who were his students? Did he ever go to class? Who were his classmates? How come NOBODY remembers him, and nobody is trying to cash out with the memories? VERY VERY ODD! BTW, does he have a birth certificate yet or real SSN?

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (113120)	9/17/2011 3:48:09 PM
From: lorne	2 Recommendations Respond to of 224756

ken...hussein obama's desperation plan? or maybe planned all along, sound like a goods alinsky plan. Makes a person wonder just how much power hussein obama would have under marshal law? The use of the term "Day of Rage" recalls the "Days of Rage" organized in the 1960s by the Weather Underground domestic terrorist organization co-founded by Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, close associates for years of President Obama.".... Protesters begin 'Day of Rage' against capitalism Demonstration plans to 'occupy' Wall Street, camp out for months if necessary September 17, 2011 wnd.com Social media networks fomenting a nationwide "Day of Rage" protest are reporting that hundreds have gathered in New York City's financial district to protest "Wall Street's corporate plunder." According to a Bloomberg report, organizers had originally hoped as many as 20,000 would gather in the financial district and "occupy" it through tent cities and civil disobedience, if necessary, for months. As a loosely formed conglomerate of Twitter, Facebook and online activists – similar to the Arab spring protesters that have been toppling governments in Africa – clearly identifying the goals and tactics of the protests is nearly impossible. According to the website Adbusters, a group promoting the demonstration, the goal of "#OccupyWallStreet" is to get President Barack Obama to establish a commission to end "the influence money has over our representatives in Washington." The group advocates camping out in Manhattan for months if needed to get the message across. But the USDayofRage.org website warns against setting up tents and describes the purpose of the protest this way: "Wall Street is a huge contributor to the political machine, which in turns enables Wall Street's corporate plunder of our nation. Both the Democratic and Republican parties set the bankster agenda because of the money. "Bought by hard and soft dollars, disloyal, incompetent and wasteful interests have usurped our nation's civil and military power, spawning a host of threats to liberty and national security," the website continues. "We demand satisfaction for the wrongs done to our nation and its people." The protest aims to take root around the world. Activists are advertising on social network sites such as Facebook and Twitter for the "Day of Rage" to begin with the "occupation" of Wall Street and continue with protests across the nation in Portland, Ore., Los Angeles, San Francisco, Seattle and Austin, Texas. The Department of Homeland Security further issued a bulletin expecting related protests in the financial districts of Madrid, Milan, London and Paris, as well. As WND reported, advertisements claim the protests at Wall Street and nationwide will be "non-violent." However, the official website provides resources, including videos and detailed written instructions, for protesters to engage in "civil disobedience." The resources provided include instructions on how to resist police arrest and disrupt court hearings. This week, the 'Day of Rage' Twitter feed posted links to what it called "nonviolent civil disobedience training talks." Similar instructions are provided on the website of an affiliated organization, which calls itself "Occupy Wall Street" and is also involved in planning the Sept. 17 protests. Live Twitter feeds from protesters indicate police presence in Manhattan has been heavy, but no violence has yet been reported. "Lots of police and barricades," reports Twitter user Ethar El-Katatney, "but strangely quiet." The use of the term "Day of Rage" recalls the "Days of Rage" organized in the 1960s by the Weather Underground domestic terrorist organization co-founded by Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, close associates for years of President Obama. Numerous radicals, many with direct ties to Obama, are linked to planned protests and other activism scheduled for the coming months. In March, ACORN founder Wade Rathke announced what he called "days of rage in 10 cities around JP Morgan Chase." Rathke was president of an SEIU local in New Orleans. The planned Sept. 17 protest appears to be the culmination of Rathke's efforts. Those efforts are being organized by Stephen Lerner, an SEIU board member who reportedly visited the Obama White House at least four times. Lerner is considered one of the most capable organizers of the radical left. He recently organized the SEIU's so-called Justice for Janitors campaign. As part of his planned protests, Lerner called for "a week of civil disobedience, direct action all over the city." His stated aim is to "destabilize the folks that are in power and start to rebuild a movement." In an interview about the planned protests, Lerner outlined his goals: "How do we bring down the stock market? How do we bring down their bonuses? How do we interfere with their ability to, to be rich?"

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (113120)	9/17/2011 3:51:17 PM
From: longnshort	2 Recommendations Respond to of 224756

Did Obama’s investment play role in pressuring 4-star general to change testimony? posted at 10:00 am on September 17, 2011 by Ed Morrissey Earlier this week, Eli Lake reported that the four-star Air Force general in charge of US Space Command told a Congressional panel that the White House pressured him to change his testimony to favor a company that shelled out donations for Democrats. LightSquared wants to press forward on a project that the military fears will create serious interference with GPS systems, and General William Shelton was going to address those concerns with Congress before the White House tried to push him into saying a few nice words on behalf of their sponsor. A reminder: The four-star Air Force general who oversees U.S. Space Command walked into a highly secured room on Capitol Hill a week ago to give a classified briefing to lawmakers and staff, and dropped a surprise. Pressed by members, Gen. William Shelton said the White House tried to pressure him to change his testimony to make it more favorable to a company tied to a large Democratic donor. … According to officials familiar with the situation, Shelton’s prepared testimony was leaked in advance to the company. And the White House asked the general to alter the testimony to add two points: that the general supported the White House policy to add more broadband for commercial use; and that the Pentagon would try to resolve the questions around LightSquared with testing in just 90 days. Shelton chafed at the intervention, which seemed to soften the Pentagon’s position and might be viewed as helping the company as it tries to get the project launched, the officials said. As it turns out, LightSquared is more than just a Democratic donor. The Lonely Conservative points us to a July 2011 article at The Huffington Post, in which it seems that Barack Obama himself has a personal interest in LightSquared: When the Federal Communications Commission granted LightSquared Inc. expedited approval to launch a new wireless Internet service, some powerful voices in Washington expressed alarm, including the Pentagon and one-third of the U.S. Senate. LightSquared’s bold $14 billion plan, its detractors said, could cripple GPS systems and threaten aviation safety, disrupt military and rescue operations and interfere with high-tech farming equipment and the everyday navigation devices used by millions. … Several major Democratic campaign contributors and longtime Obama supporters have held investments in the company and its affiliates during its tangled decade of existence. They include Obama’s good friend and political donor Donald Gips, his former White House personnel chief, who now serves as U.S. ambassador to South Africa. Records show that Gips maintained an interest, worth as much as $500,000, as the FCC was weighing LightSquared’s request. Obama himself was an early investor and came to the presidency a firm believer in expanding broadband. He remains close to other early investors, like Gips and investment manager George W. Haywood, inviting some to luxe social events at the White House and more intimate gatherings like a night of poker and beer. Presidents put their investments into blind trusts when they take office in order to avoid the appearance of conflicts of interest. Well, most modern Presidents do, anyway. It seems that Obama considers himself an exception to this rule, or at the very least he did until April 2010. The Washington Post’s Michael Shear reported at that time that Obama had refused to establish a blind trust: In fact, President Obama has rejected the approach taken by most of his predecessors in the modern era. His personal wealth — which is rapidly growing — is not shielded from his view. Why not? Officially, the answer is that the president wanted more transparency in his personal finances — fitting in with his pledges to be the most open White House in history. “The choice not to have a blind trust is an effort to be transparent about where his money is kept, and the public can see his latest financial disclosure documents, which we have made public and accessible on the Web site,” a senior White House official said. Well, sort of. The records are not on line, but the White House website does have a request page, which promises to send a PDF of the financial disclosure forms quickly. I’ve requested a copy and will check to see whether Obama still holds any position with LightSquared. I’m going to guess no, only because it appears from Shear’s article that Obama converted most of his holdings into bonds in order to avoid the blind trust. However, as the HuffPo report notes, that’s not the only problem in this scenario. It’s clear that even if Obama divested himself of LightSquared at some point, he has remained close to the other investors. If the White House pressured Shelton in order to benefit these investors, then we need to find out whether Obama gave that order himself on behalf of his cronies. hotair.com

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (113120)	9/17/2011 3:52:26 PM
From: TideGlider	2 Recommendations Respond to of 224756

If you learned to read and comprehend you might have come away with my concern for what possible scandal/embarrassing incident etc could be locked away with his school records. Obama does not strike me as a very responsible person...not at all really.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (113120)	9/17/2011 3:54:11 PM
From: lorne	4 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 224756

What? California's Dianne Feinstein in poll trouble too? September 16, 2011 latimesblogs.latimes.com Oh, no! Another Democratic senator in possible election trouble for 2012. And from California already? A new Field Poll just released this morning brings news that California's Sen. Dianne Feinstein is -- how can we put this in a liberal kind of way? -- approved by 41% of voters who want to see her reelected next year. Unfortunately for her, more voters (fully 44%) disapprove of her continued employment in the U.S. Senate after 2012. In blue California that makes for about a magnitude 5.2 quake. The same poll finds that only 41% approve of Feinstein's job in Washington, while 39% disapprove. That 41 approval number is the lowest the former mayor has ever had in her 20 years of no longer really living in California. Another recent Field Poll showed many Californians are falling out of love with the teleprompter guy from Chicago. His California approval has slid below 50% for the first time ever, down to 46%. That's a decline of about two points per month recently. Is his slide now corroding the election prospects of even such party stalwarts as Feinstein? Add to that the overall -- how can we say this in a polite way? -- disgust with the United States Congress (nine out of every 100 Californians now approve of those guys) and this could spell t-r-o-u-b-l-e for Democrats. They or independent allies need to lose only six seats to turn the Senate over to those people that Vice President Joe "#%$&*(@" Biden politely calls "barbarians." Democrats next year are defending two-thirds of the 33 Senate seats on state ballots. Good luck with that at 9% unemployment. President Obama, who's now passed Biden as the nation's most voluble, least effective job creator, is about due for another money run to Hollywood. Oh, look! Our pal, the well-connected Tina Daunt is writing in the Hollywood Reporter that the one-time 40-something star of the celebrity set is having real trouble now raking in the easy dough from disappointed West Coast Dems. Maybe the 78-year-old chairman of the Senate Intelligence committee will factor that intelligence into her as yet unannounced decision on seeking a fourth term on the same ticket as Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel's former boss.