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 (130046)	4/15/2012 12:17:22 PM
From: TideGlider	5 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224769

You idiot. That is frigging stupid. Not to mention the frighteningly high amount of extortion paid to "Chocolate City". If Obama had dealt with real problems rather than cronysim we would have been up and running years ago.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (130046)	4/15/2012 12:42:16 PM
From: longnshort	3 Recommendations Respond to of 224769

This strikes me as unseemly. The ONLY reason you do this is not just to avoid taxes, but to avoid DEATH taxes -- the most egregious tax of all, which Obama and other liberals love as a technique of limiting the accumulation of wealth. Just as Warren Buffett is doing as quickly as he can. Do as I say, not as I do. ============== President Obama and his wife, Michele, gave a total of $48,000 in tax-free gifts to their daughters, according to tax records made public on Friday. The president and his wife separately gave each daughter a $12,000 gift under a section of the federal tax code that exempts such donations from federal taxes. There is nothing illegal about the president’s taking advantage of this tax shelter, but it does raise eyebrows given that he has lamented the myriad tax exemptions used by the wealthy—“millionaires and billionaires” like himself—to pay less in taxes. He has yet to propose a comprehensive plan to reform the byzantine tax code. The Obama’s tax return indicates that the gifts, likely for their daughter’s college educations, began in 2007, when the maximum exemptible amount was $24,000 per couple. The maximum exemption has since increased to $26,000 per couple. The Obamas paid a total federal tax rate of 20.5 percent on a gross adjusted income $789,674, which would typically fall within the top federal rate of 35 percent. According to an analysis of the president’s tax return, he may have paid a lower rate than his secretary despite making more than eight times as much money as she did. His most recent tax proposal—the so-called “ Buffett Rule”—would increase taxes on about 4,000 millionaires and raise about $4.7 billion in new revenue per year, enough to cover about 0.4 percent of the projected budget deficit in 2012. Though the rule would apparently not hit the president himself. Supporters of the rule have acknowledged that the projected revenue from the “Buffett Rule,” which the Democratic-led Senate is expected to vote down, is “ not even a meaningful small amount.” The Obama’s untaxed gift to their daughters will leave American taxpayers to subsidize the college education of the children of the multi-millionaire Obamas. h/t inode

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (130046)	4/15/2012 12:48:08 PM
From: locogringo	4 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 224769

Bush is not running for president, you mumbling clown. Let's talk about the record and accomplishments of the moron in office now, instead of your typical diversions. Of course, you have nothing to say, since he did nothing but bankrupt the working class for the benefit of losers and freeloaders. Your owners must be proud of you.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (130046)	4/15/2012 12:49:44 PM
From: tonto	2 Recommendations Respond to of 224769

Obama certainly was not over worked over the crisis...maybe you meant he played the crisis like a child... He certainly was able to vacation a lot and play golf...which may ekain why he made so many poor decisions.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (130046)	4/15/2012 12:51:11 PM
From: longnshort	2 Recommendations Respond to of 224769

Al Qaeda Attorney Becomes Number Three Man in the DOJ April 14, 2012 By Sara Noble Tony West, From Al Qaeda 7 to DOJ 3 Obama’s new appointee, friend and major campaign donor, Tony West, believes terrorism is a matter for criminal courts and not military tribunals. He does not believe any enemy of the United States is a terrorist. He has a history of vigorously supporting Al Qaeda terrorists and is now in charge of the GITMO terrorists’ trials. It puts him in a supervisory position of the government lawyers charged with prosecuting the terrorists. Tony West was the aggressive defense lawyer for John Walker Lindh, the American Taliban. Despite his alarmingly vigorous and sometimes irrational defense of Lindh, Lindh is serving 20-years in prison, though it should have been life. Lindh colluded with al Qaeda in Afghanistan and took up arms against U.S. troops. West is also a major Obama campaign bundler and has raised a great deal of money for him. His sister-in-law, Kamala Harris, is in line for the next important government job, perhaps as eventual head of the DOJ. According to the Free Beacon - President Obama appointed West as the DOJ’s acting associate attorney general, a posting that does not require Senate confirmation. He formally began the job on Monday. As the department’s third in command, West is tasked with defending a broad array of legal matters, such as Obama’s controversial health care law and civil rights issues. He also will be in charge of “litigating national security cases, such as habeas corpus petitions brought by detainees at Guantanamo Bay,” according to the DOJ. This extremist will be the number three man with access to highly classified documents and information. He will be in charge of highly sensitive security matters though he has already shown his support for our enemies. He has fought hard for habeas corpus for detainees. His controversial past makes him unfit to oversee GITMO and he will now be in charge of military who will be litigating the very people he supports. “In any other Justice Department, in any other administration, representing the enemies of the United States would have been a disqualifier for a job inside DOJ setting detainee policy,” said J. Christian Adams, a former DOJ official in the department’s civil rights division. “But in [Attorney General] Eric Holder’s DOJ, it seems to be the chief prerequisite.” Rep. Joe Walsh of Ill. said - “When I first learned of this, I thought it is outrageous; but it’s getting redundant with this president,” Walsh, who said he plans on authoring a letter to Holder expressing his dismay, told the Free Beacon. “They’re not taking this war on terrorism seriously to put a guy like this in that position—it almost seems like a real conflict of interest.” According to various reports and those familiar with the Lindh case, West went far beyond a lawyer’s call of duty by accepting the case pro bono and maintaining to this day that Lindh “is not a terrorist.” Even though Americans can be deprived of citizenship and habeas corpus under the NDAA, West wants habeas corpus for all detainees, no matter how dangerous or violent and no matter how serious their crimes. Currently, West is overseeing at least 140 active habeas corpus cases involving Gitmo detainees—and his support for expanded rights is well documented. Free Beacon:…West favors a policy that would make it easier for detainees to legally detonate the government’s case against them. “We in the Civil Division [of DOJ] have embraced procedures to help ensure a meaningful review and fair process,” West further explained in his speech. “We’ve worked hard to create a process that allows habeas council to review classified evidence; we have taken on significant discovery obligations to provide access to classified material in the government’s files that could be helpful to the detainee in challenging the government’s case.” He adds: “The burden of proof rests with the government—not the detainee—and we must demonstrate that detention is lawful by a preponderance of evidence.” These views—combined with his emphatic defense of Lindh—have left legal observers to wonder whether the administration is serious about defending the country against enemy threats. “If you volunteer your services to the enemy in wartime, … that’s not performing the traditional role of an attorney in the U.S. justice system,” said Andrew McCarthy, a former assistant U.S. attorney who led the 1995 prosecution of Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman—the so-called “Blind Sheik”—and several other terrorists. “That is helping the enemy in wartime.”… Keep Reading One GOP observor said, “We should not be surprised that an attorney general whose law firm defended several Gitmo detainees would put the American Taliban’s lawyer in charge of detainee policy,” a senior GOP adviser in Congress who declined to be named told the WFB. “While frightening and appalling, the attorney general knows full well that this appointment is mere window dressing for the president’s liberal base and that the Congress will never back down from its prohibition on detainee transfer to the United States.” Read more: Obama elite taking over