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 (146997)	10/25/2012 1:51:41 PM
From: JakeStraw	9 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224738

The "Cult of Obama" is fading. People realize now how dangerous he is to this country....Frankly all you Obamaites should be ashamed...

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (146997)	10/25/2012 1:54:52 PM
From: TopCat	5 Recommendations Respond to of 224738

"Not unless you believe a terrorist post on face book is evidence." LOL...so now you're parroting that tidbit. They were watching the attack with real time video. Do you really think they couldn't determine from that that it was a terrorist attack?

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (146997)	10/25/2012 2:04:45 PM
From: JakeStraw	4 Recommendations Respond to of 224738

Obama Knew spectator.org ...did an ideological soft spot for Sharia -- Obama's name is being used by his step-grandmother to raise funds to educate kids in Sharia -- blind the U.S. government to the threat posed by Ansar Al-Sharia? A group whose objective, says its Libyan leader, is to "impose Sharia" on Libya. ...officials reported within hours of last month's deadly consulate attack in Libya that Al Qaeda-tied group Ansar al-Sharia had claimed responsibility. Catch that phrase? The Obama Administration knew specifically "within hours" that the attack on the Libyan consulate was a terrorist attack and that, per one e-mail, "Ansar Al-Sharia Claims Responsibility for Benghazi Attack." (Note: interestingly, both Reuters and CBS ran this story -- standing out from their mainstream media fellows.)

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (146997)	10/25/2012 2:10:00 PM
From: JakeStraw	3 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224738

To strengthen the economy, John F. Kennedy called tax cuts on business and all income groups, a less expansionary government, a simplified tax code that downsized loopholes and special privileges, and the removal of obstacles to private initiative. The "most direct and significant kind of federal action aiding economic growth is to make possible an increase in private consumption and investment demand -- to cut the fetters which hold back private spending," he asserted. In contrast, a course of "increasing federal expenditures more rapidly than necessary," he warned, "would soon demoralize both the government and our economy." Kennedy called for "an across-the-board, top-to-bottom cut in personal and corporate income taxes" in order to reduce "the deterrents to private initiative which are imposed by our current tax system" -- a federal tax system that "exerts too heavy a drag on growth," "siphons out of the private economy too large a share of personal and business purchasing power," and "reduces the financial incentive for personal effort, investment, and risk-taking." Kennedy's bottom line? "In short," he stated, "to increase demand and lift the economy, the federal government's most useful role is not to rush into a program of excessive increases in public expenditures, but to expand the initiatives and opportunities for private expenditures." And the impact of tax cuts on deficits? "Our true choice is not between tax reduction, on the one hand, and the avoidance of large federal deficits on the other," he declared. The"paradoxical truth" is that "tax rates are too high today and tax revenues are too low and the soundest way to raise revenues in the long run is to cut the rates now." Those were the good old days, a time when Democrats and liberals understood that it's economic growth, not redistribution, that delivers overall increases in a nation's standard of living, across all income groups. spectator.org

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (146997)	10/25/2012 2:12:45 PM
From: JakeStraw	4 Recommendations Respond to of 224738

Since Barack Obama took office, Islamist antagonists, other than those involved in active hostilities like al Qaeda and the Taliban, whose hostility cannot be denied or ignored, have gone unnamed. Presidential statements on the anniversaries of the 1983 killing of 242 U.S. servicemen in Lebanon by Hizballah or the 1979 seizure by Islamist students of the U.S. embassy in Tehran, to name two examples, failed to even mention the perpetrators of these acts, as it had become U.S. policy to propitiate both parties. Indeed, the Obama Administration has refused to associate terrorists attacking America with Islam. Administration officials have spent four years speaking of particular terrorists at home and abroad as isolated "extremists," even when Islamist terrorist connections (for example, between Fort Hood sniper Nidal Hassan and the American-born al Qaeda in Yemen leader, Anwar al-Awlaki, who advised him) were readily traceable. spectator.org