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 (120610)12/24/2011 8:50:57 AM
From: Kenneth E. Phillipps  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 224713
 
Ohio and Michigan are doing relatively well in job recovery - a plus 1.5% the past year - thanks to saving GM and Chrysler from bankruptcy because that would have lost so many jobs in the supplier sector.



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (120610)12/24/2011 9:29:25 AM
From: locogringo8 Recommendations  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 224713
 
I saw this on another thread and it makes sense to me. The gun running in Fast and Furious must have been RACIALLY motivated by Holder the racist and his racist department.

All of the dead people are Hispanic, except for one (maybe 2) Americans.

Congressman trumps Holder’s race card, asks if Mexican gun-walking deaths were ‘racially motivated’

news.yahoo.com



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (120610)12/24/2011 10:34:32 AM
From: tonto8 Recommendations  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 224713
 
Kenneth, why is unemployment so much higher in your state than here in WI?



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (120610)12/25/2011 8:45:11 AM
From: lorne3 Recommendations  Respond to of 224713
 
ken...Not so happy a CHRISTMAS for non moslums in Egypt.. With mubarak non moslums had at least some protection from the radical moslums,,,

Another great picture for your bedroom wall of heros.

Jews and Christians are 'infidels,' reiterates Salafist cleric
Hardliner Salafists are unwilling to tone down their views, despite fears over the dominance of Islamists in the coming parliament
, Saturday 24 Dec 2011
english.ahram.org.eg



Prominent Salafist cleric Yasser Borhami has reiterated his controversial stance on Jews and Christians, describing both as "infidels".

Borhami, one of several extremist Salafist sheikhs renowned for eccentric and bizarre statements, said he would not reverse his opinion to seek political gains.

“I hold on to my stance that Jews and Christians are infidels, but they do have rights that Allah has given them,” he stated during a press conference in Dakahliah, north east of Cairo.

Borhami, the deputy leader of the Salafist call (Al-Dawaa Al-Salafiyya), was instrumental in forming Al-Nour Party in 2011, commonly viewed today as Al-Daawa’s political arm.

The Nour Party has been thus far the second biggest winner in the ongoing parliamentary elections, behind the Muslim Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party (FJP).

After the Nour Party’s initial triumph in the ballot, liberals and secularists started to voice fears over the Salafist impact on the political landscape, economy and social freedoms.

Al-Nour Party President Emad El-Din Abdel Gafour and spokesperson Nader Bakar tried to reassure critics through relatively moderate statements, unlike Borhami.

“We would never give up our thoughts for politics,” Borhami added.

Al-Nour’s parliamentary candidate Hazem Shoman is another Salafist sheikh who has made the headlines for his acid tongue and abrasive nature. He also spoke at the conference.

“Deviating from Islamic Sharia is the reason why Egypt was vanquished in 1967 [by Israel] and 2,700 women have committed suicide for being spinsters,” Shoman said.



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (120610)12/25/2011 8:45:45 AM
From: lorne4 Recommendations  Respond to of 224713
 
Obama's new plan for stuffing ballot boxes
Posted: December 23, 2011
Tom Tancredo
wnd.com

Each week seems to bring a new assault on the Constitution from Attorney General Eric Holder. When will Congress decide enough is enough and launch a full-on impeachment probe?

Holder's arrogance has no parallel in politics today. Halting the prosecution of New Black Panther Party voter intimidation activities, subverting immigration law enforcement and stonewalling a congressional investigation into the Fast and Furious scheme are not enough for Holder and the Obama administration. Now they are taking aim at state laws designed to prevent vote fraud in the 2012 election.

Holder announced recently in a speech in Austin, Texas, that he thinks requiring a person to show a photo ID to cast a ballot is a reincarnation of Jim Crow laws that obstructed black registration and voting. Citing the 1965 Voting Rights Act, Obama's Attorney General threatens to use the full powers of the federal government to overturn any state law that can be shown to have a "disparate impact" on minority voting.

Liberals like Holder who make such arguments have a couple of formidable obstacles. First, those words – "disparate impact" – do not appear in the 1965 voting rights legislation. Those words and that standard are an addition to the law created by federal judges as an extension of the original meaning and purpose of the act.

A second big obstacle for Holder is that the U.S. Supreme Court has more than once upheld state laws requiring photo ID to vote and similar voter integrity measures. If administered fairly and in a color-blind fashion, they are legal.

Holder and Obama already know this. They know that in the short term, they will probably lose such cases. But their real plan as far as 2012 is concerned is not litigation. It is intimidation. They only have to win this one election. If they do, all future elections will be different.

Their motives and long-term goals are revealed in another of Holder's ideas – the vast expansion of voter rolls. His idea is not yet a legislative proposal, but we can expect to see it in full bloom if Obama wins a second term.

Attorney General Holder does not believe it is enough to prohibit racial discrimination in voter registration or voting procedures. It is not enough for each state to guarantee that any person legally eligible to vote may register to vote, and if they choose to do so, can vote in an election. Holder believes we must stretch the concept of non-discrimination to guarantee equal outcomes at the ballot.

Holder believes that since minorities do not turn out to vote in the same percentages as Caucasians, the present system is discriminatory on its face. In his view, the system must be redesigned to assure equal turnouts by all racial, ethnic and gender classes.


Holder suggests two radical changes in how we fulfill our "civic obligation" to vote. Since it is a civic obligation, Holder wants active government measures to insure each person fulfills that obligation. How? He wants automatic voter registration for every person who turns 18, and he wants to see energetic government efforts to guarantee that every person registered to vote actually casts a ballot. States that do not enact such measures will be held in violation of the law.

Now, you may object that such a radical redesign of our voter registration and voting practices is nowhere mandated under the U.S. Constitution, and you would be right. But you would also be missing the point. If the Constitution is what five of nine justices of the U.S. Supreme Court say it is on any given Monday, then anything is possible. If you propose it, and somehow get Congress to enact it, you may eventually find five judges to agree with you.

How will election outcomes be different under Holder's vision of 100 percent voter registration and 100 percent guaranteed turnout? Instead of the usual pattern of differing Republican and Democrat turnout and usually lower unaffiliated voter turnout, differences based on candidates and issues, we would have 100 percent "turnout" from all registered voters in every election. Bear in mind that "turnout" no longer means what it meant for 200 years. Now a voter can cast a ballot from home – or from a homeless shelter, hospital bed or church parking lot – three weeks ahead of Election Day.

Are you wondering how an enlightened, progressive government will encourage and facilitate this "100 percent participation" in elections? Well, use your imagination. Never mind that such "total participation" for total community happiness is achieved only in totalitarian regimes.

To achieve this sublime state of participatory cohesion will require an army of "community organizers" and "civic participation advocates" – funded by government grants. That army will help the less informed and less motivated amongst us fill out our ballots correctly and put them in the mail. No one must be allowed to shrink from his civic duty, even if they are abysmally ignorant of the issues and have to be coached and "assisted" in casting a ballot. As I said, use your imagination and get your grant application ready.

Through such measures as Holder is proposing, the "progressive state" will move a giant step closer to its ultimate aim: manipulation of elections to prevent any interruption or change in direction of "public services." Elections will no longer be permitted to subvert or obstruct the progressive agenda.

It does seem odd that minorities have no problem meeting the requirement for a photo ID when driving a car, cashing a check or passing through security at an airport. Yet, somehow, to Eric Holder, the act of voting is different. We are asked to believe – and judges are being asked to interpret the law to say – that requiring a photo ID to vote has discriminatory motives.

In one sense, Holder is right. Requiring a photo ID to vote does indeed discriminate: It discriminates against fraud.

Unfortunately, to Eric Holder and his progressive allies, fraud, like racism, is only wrong if perpetrated by the bad guys and never wrong when practiced by the good guys. The Catch-22 is this: Citizens at large do not get to decide who are the bad guys or the good guys. That would be an excess of democracy. Only activist judges committed to our "living Constitution" get to decide that.



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (120610)12/25/2011 8:46:21 AM
From: lorne4 Recommendations  Respond to of 224713
 
ACORN leaders ramp up White House visitations
Author: Strategy developing to tilt elections to Democrats
December 24, 2011
wnd.com


Operatives of the radical left-wing ideology of ACORN appear to be working with the Obama administration on a strategy to tilt the 2012 elections in favor of Democrats, according to award-winning investigative reporter Matthew Vadum. ACORN leaders have made multiple visits to the Obama White House and the Department of Justice, new evidence shows.

Their goal is to get the government to spend more money on registering welfare recipients and the poor, who are typically Democratic voters, said Vadum, author of the explosive new book "Subversion Inc.: How Obama's ACORN Red Shirts are Still Terrorizing and Ripping Off American Taxpayers."

Obama long ago endorsed the strategy of using welfare recipients to expand the size and scope of government.

Get the inside story on the undermining of the U.S., in "Subversion Inc.: How Obama's ACORN Red Shirts are Still Terrorizing and Ripping Off American Taxpayers."

"All our people must know that politics and voting affects their lives directly," he said in 1992. "If we're registering people in public housing, for an example, we talk about aid cuts and who's responsible."

Obama's Department of Justice has come under fire for refusing to enforce Section 8 of the National Voting Rights Act (NVRA), also known as the Motor-Voter law. Section 8 requires states to remove the names of ineligible felons, the dead, and non-residents from voter rolls. At the same time DOJ has been vigorously enforcing Section 7 which compels states to register voters at welfare offices.

In his book Vadum writes that Section 7 of NVRA amounts to a huge taxpayer subsidy for Democratic candidates. Sanford Newman, founder of ACORN affiliate Project Vote, has acknowledged his group's work helps the Left almost exclusively.

"While our work is nonpartisan, it is realistic to assume that upward of 90 percent of the people we register on unemployment and other social service distribution lines will oppose politicians who have supported cuts in the programs on which they rely," he said. "They are likely to vote Democratic in most instances."

ACORN leaders are pressuring the government to drop pending investigations of massive voter fraud across the nation, said Vadum, a senior editor at Capital Research Center, a think tank that studies left-wing advocacy groups and their funders. His book is the product of nearly three years of research and hundreds of interviews.

So far this year five ACORN leaders visited the White House. One of those ACORN leaders, former ACORN attorney Estelle H. Rogers, is now director of advocacy at ACORN-affiliated Project Vote.

Project Vote is the affiliate of the ACORN network that Obama worked for in 1992 when he led a voter mobilization campaign in Illinois that helped to elect the radical Carol Moseley Braun as a U.S. senator. Obama went on to train ACORN activists and represent ACORN in court as the group's lawyer.

Project Vote's official position is that voter fraud is a myth that Republicans created to deprive Democrats of their votes. The group demonizes anyone who thinks voter ID requirements are good public policy and lobbies for policies that make voter fraud easier to perpetrate.

Rogers visited the Obama White House on March 2, 2011, according to the White House visitors' database. She met with Shasti Conrad, senior aide to Obama senior adviser Valerie Jarrett, and Jon Carson, director of the White House Office of Public Engagement. Carson previously served as chief of staff at the White House Council on Environmental Quality serving under green jobs czar Van Jones, the self-described communist forced out for signing a 9/11 "truther" petition that blamed President George W. Bush for the 2001 terrorist attacks.

Documents obtained by Judicial Watch under the Freedom of Information Act also show that Rogers wrote T. Christian Herren, chief of the Voting Section in the DOJ's Civil Rights Division, recommending three candidates for positions at the DOJ.

"I want to heartily recommend two candidates to you," Rogers wrote in a Feb. 23, 2010, email to DOJ's Herren. DOJ redacted the names of the candidates. Rogers followed up on April 20, 2010, writing, "I look forward to continuing to work with you, Chris. And please let me know if you need any more feedback regarding hires."

Rogers wrote another email to Herren on Dec. 7, 2010. "I'd still love to talk for real, but in the meantime, the main reason I called is that you have an applicant for the [REDACTED] position [REDACTED] qualifies ... beautifully for your position, and I hope you will give her every consideration. [REDACTED] So she would be a great fit, and I recommend her without reservation. Please let me know if I can tell you more. And give me a call if you possibly can."

Documents released by Judicial Watch also show that Associate Attorney General Thomas J. Perrelli met with "civil rights groups" on March 17, 2011, to talk about Section 7 of NVRA. The groups at the progressive pow-wow were Project Vote, Demos, Brennan Center for Justice, NAACP Legal Defense Fund, Fair Elections Legal Network, American Association of People with Disabilities, League of Women Voters, Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, and Paralyzed Veterans of America.

Rogers has been collaborating with the Obama administration since before Inauguration Day in January 2009. She filed what Project Vote called a "voting rights agenda" submission with the Obama-Biden presidential transition team in 2008.

That agenda includes lawsuits filed recently in several states by Project Vote and the groups it is aligned with. The litigation is calculated to intimidate state officials into not investigating claims of rampant voter fraud.

"The lawsuits are coming out of nowhere in multiple states and they are coming fast," said Anita MonCrief, a former Project Vote employee.

"This is part of a coordinated effort," she said. "These groups are very well-funded, and they have lawyers doing pro bono work."

Rogers hinted at the litigation attack in a July 13, 2010, email to Herren and DOJ political appointee Julie Fernandes. Rogers indicated that she would be bringing Project Vote election counsel Niyati Shah to a meeting at DOJ.

Shah "will be working on a lot of the litigation we'll be telling you about."

Rogers said Nicole Kovite Zeitler, director of Project Vote's welfare voter registration project, would also be in attendance.

As reported in Vadum's book, former DOJ lawyer J. Christian Adams said Fernandes told department lawyers that the agency had no interest in enforcing Section 8 of NVRA because, she said, it "doesn’t have anything to do with increasing minority turnout."

Incidentally, Barack Obama wasn't the first leftist to come up with the idea of registering welfare recipients to vote themselves greater benefits at the expense of taxpayers. The idea was put forward in the mid 1960s by communist sympathizers Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven. The Marxist duo said "massive numbers of new voters" had to be registered in order to bring "fundamental change" to the nation. Cloward and Piven helped to write the Motor-Voter law. Even today Piven is a member of Project Vote's board of directors.

Four other ACORN operatives visited the Obama White House on March 22, 2011, for a meeting with White House policy assistant David Pope. They are Brian Kettenring, Darlene D. Battle, Steven Fletcher, and Leigh Dingerson.

From 1995 to 2009 Kettenring served as deputy director of national operations for ACORN.

Battle ran ACORN in Philadelphia and is now executive director of Delawareans for Social and Economic Justice, one of two dozen new ACORN front groups that have popped up around the nation. ACORN, the shell corporation that ruled ACORN's network of 370 affiliated groups, filed bankruptcy in November 2010 after ordering its state chapters to incorporate themselves separately in order to carry on ACORN's work.

Fletcher is the former top organizer for ACORN in Minnesota. He is now executive director of Minnesota Neighborhoods Organizing for Change (MNNOC), a new ACORN front group.

Dingerson worked as a community organizer with ACORN between 1978 and 1982.



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (120610)12/26/2011 8:51:07 AM
From: lorne7 Recommendations  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 224713
 
Merry Christmas! Happy Hanukkah! And Happy New Year!
December 25, 2011
Herman Cain
We The People
wnd.com



I said it. So send the politically correct police after me.

Even though most people are not offended by these opening salutations, we hear many stories about an element of our society that appears to be trying to take Christ out of Christmas, happy out of Hanukkah and New Year.

Some public schools have insisted on calling this season their "holiday break" instead of the traditional Christmas break. Fine! So which holidays are they referring to? Some schools have even banned images of Santa and the presence of poinsettia flowers with the distinguishing red leaves, because those symbols might remind kids of (don't say it) Christmas.

There was even a case in Illinois where an atheist sued the school district for allowing kids to have a moment of silence because in that moment they might think about God or Christ. Heaven forbid we might even think about God!

And some cities do not want to allow nativity scenes to be displayed in the public square (places owned by the citizens) because it might offend someone. Well, I am offended that they might be offended by what I believe, since I am not offended by what they chose not to believe.

If this nonsense is the barometer of our society, then we have gone from political correctness to political stupidity. For those who disagree with me up to this point in this commentary, you can stop reading now because I'm going to annoy you even more in the rest of it.

The overwhelming majority of believers in the United States are Judeo-Christian believers. We fully respect those who happen to believe in any other legitimate religion.

When the Founding Fathers said in the Declaration of Independence that they (we the people) are "endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights," each of us gets to choose our Creator and it did not say we could not express our belief in that Creator. And one of those unalienable rights is to be able to express our beliefs openly and freely. It's called the First Amendment to the Constitution, which many people also misinterpret.

If some people do not like red cars, does that mean red cars should be banned from the highway? Of course not! That would be stupid. But it seems that some people are on the highway to stupid land under the umbrella of political correctness.

Some of us believe Christ is the Son of God. I do. We believe the celebration of His birth is called Christmas, and He lives in our hearts and in our lives. As for me and "my house," he lives in our hearts and in our lives. By the way, the Holy Bible is the basis for this radical annoying faith that many of us share.

I will not apologize for my faith, and I will not hide it! As Christians, we must not only push back, but we must also fight back to maintain our collective rights. And for those who are offended by our expression of Christmas and other religious holidays, you are free to close your eyes and look the other way when passing a Christian nativity scene. And if you chose to not think about God or His son in a moment of silence, then don't.

We will.

Merry Christmas to all Christian believers and non-believers! God will bless you anyway, because that's just the way He is.

Christmas lives here! Get over it.



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (120610)12/26/2011 8:51:49 AM
From: lorne5 Recommendations  Respond to of 224713
 
Obama liberals' hatred for religious freedom
December 25, 2011
William J. Murray
wnd.com

There is little doubt that the Obama White House was behind the attempt to defund and shut down the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom. The USCIRF is an embarrassment to an administration, which wants to pretend that Shariah law, which permits honor killings, is no different than English Common Law. The bleak reports from the USCIRF on religious persecution in many of the Islamic nations favored by President Obama moved his administration to shut down the USCIRF using a back door in the budget process. His point man, Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., is from Obama's home state. Durbin was Obama's former colleague in the Senate and is now the majority whip, the No. 2 Democrat in the Senate.

The House voted to fund the USCIRF earlier this year. Durbin held the funding hostage in the Senate with a "secret hold," but let everyone know the hold was his. In late December, Republicans, with much outside pressure from groups such as the Religious Freedom Coalition, forced through temporary funding; however, Durbin added a last-minute amendment that ousted Bush appointees using "term limits," which will allow President Obama to stack the deck with liberals who have no problem with Islamic honor killings. The main sponsor of the funding reauthorization in the House, Rep. Frank Wolf, R-Va., called the demand blackmail.

Durbin showed his true colors when tacking on the amendment to the reauthorization of the USCIRF. The amendment retroactively limited commissioners to a total of four years of service; thus he rid the commission of some of the most outspoken critics of Islamic extremism such as Nina Shea who has co-authored scholarly works on the subject such as "Silenced: How Apostasy and Blasphemy Codes are Choking Freedom Worldwide."

His amendment also limited travel of commissioners to the same standards as the State Department, meaning they are now restricted from traveling to areas where religious freedom is most in jeopardy. For example, State Department staff may not travel to areas of the Sudan or Nigeria, where Christians have been slaughtered by Islamists. Indeed, commissioners can no longer travel to East Jerusalem. Durbin's refusal to fund USCIRF had nothing to do with freeing up money to fund a prison in Illinois, as his staff suggested, and had everything to do with shutting down critics of radical Islam.

Back in 2005, while George W. Bush was still in office, Durbin compared American soldiers to Nazis. Today, he is the second most powerful man in the U.S. Senate, after Majority Leader Harry Reid, and that makes his staff powerful on Capitol Hill. One of Durbin's key staffers, Reema B. Dodin, is in regular contact with the Council on American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR, which is an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terrorism case. Dodin is a Palestinian rights activist who organized anti-Israel rallies at the University of California at Berkeley as a student. Dodin was also a member of the Muslim Students Association, which was founded by the Muslim Brotherhood. Durbin's desire to shut down the USCIRF should not come as a surprise to anyone, given his views on Islam and "Islamophobia."

In March of this year Durbin organized a hearing on "Islamophobia" to counter the hearings on "homegrown terrorism" in America held by Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y. The Durbin hearings featured such notables as Farhana Khera, founder of Muslim Advocates, an organization that has sued the Department of Justice to force it to disclose the FBI's undercover operations to disrupt terrorist activities inside radical mosques.

Durbin is clearly not a friend of religious freedom, unless that freedom involves the construction of a mega mosque at Ground Zero. His views clearly mirror those of President Barack Obama, as implemented by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.




To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (120610)12/26/2011 12:46:08 PM
From: chartseer1 Recommendation  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 224713
 
Happy Kwanzaa



To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (120610)12/28/2011 7:49:20 AM
From: chartseer1 Recommendation  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 224713
 
Happy Kwanzaa!