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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Paul Smith who wrote (493390)	6/29/2012 8:40:54 AM
From: goldworldnet	2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793917

Thinking along those lines, reprieving Obamacare probably hurts the economy, which hurts Obama in November. * * *

To: Paul Smith who wrote (493390)	6/29/2012 8:52:36 AM
From: alanrs	8 Recommendations Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 793917

So the wisdom of the ages got it wrong. Two birds in the bush are worth one in the hand, or maybe even more. Hmmm. It wasn't that long ago that there was a political tussle about requiring everybody to put a street number on their house. We've come a long way, baby. A lesson I learned from my third wife (may she rot in hell, bless her soul) is that smart educated people are easier to con because they are good rationalizers, they fill in the blanks to complete the picture they expect to see. Some dumb guy isn't even aware of the elements of the game, he just notices the $10 is gone and punches you in the nose. It's for the children. ARS The combination of an impressive police apparatus and onerous laws shifting assets to the law makers who are also the controllers of that police apparatus worries me some. But hey, free health care, can you dig it?

To: Paul Smith who wrote (493390)	6/29/2012 10:29:04 AM
From: MulhollandDrive	3 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793917

This is a chess game and Roberts sacrificed a piece to gain a superior position on the board.....thinking several moves ahead. "this" is no game..... if he sincerely believes that he voted with the left for any reason OTHER than he concluded (erroneously) that the ACA law was constitutional because he simply rewrote the pesky mandate 'penalty' he should be removed from office...of course that will never happen because even if he were to actually come out and publicly admit he voted against his true belief for political advantage... so, he is playing POLITICS for some type of future 'advantage'? are you joking? supposedly the life term of the supreme court justices was implemented for precisely the reason that they need not FEAR political repercussions when issuing an unpopular opinion.... this 'tactical' decision making process, if true, is complete and utter bull$hit on his part.... and personally, i don't think it is true, what i think is true is that roberts is just another DC narcissist who doesn't want to upset the applecart of unfettered federal power we are truly on our own anything the congress does under tax scheme is fair game, even if the tax is regressive, punitive and coercive against our enumerated liberties....roberts gave the constitution and the american people the back of his hand, good statist that he is, and basically said congress and the executive branch have total control over what we do and do NOT do under penalty of a TAX....if you don't like it, elect a new government....so much for checks and balances....