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 : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: T L Comiskey who wrote (89365)

2/25/2013 1:03:20 PM

From: longnshort

2 Recommendations Respond to of 89467

Obama now selling access to White House and qtrly meetings for $500K

This is pure money fed corruption.

http://hotair.com/archives/2013/02/25/video-ofa-selling-wh-access-to-donors/

Excerpt:

Finally, The New York Times reported over the weekend that donors who contribute and raise $500,000 for President Obama’s Organizing for Action will get special access to the President. That’s right. They’re selling access to the President. The new group has an ambitious goal — to raise $50 million to convert the President’s re-election campaign into an advocacy network and they’re offering access. The New York Times says ‘giving or raising $500,000 or more puts donors on a national advisory board for Mr. Obama’s group and the privilege of attending quarterly meetings with the President along with other meetings at the White House.’

To: T L Comiskey who wrote (89365)	2/27/2013 11:59:16 AM
From: longnshort	1 Recommendation Respond to of 89467

BOB WOODWARD: Obama Is Showing 'A Kind Of Madness I Haven't Seen In A Long Time' Read more: businessinsider.com The Washington Post's Bob Woodward ripped into President Barack Obama on " Morning Joe" today, saying he's exhibiting a "kind of madness I haven't seen in a long time" for a decision not to deploy an aircraft carrier to the Persian Gulf because of budget concerns. "Can you imagine Ronald Reagan sitting there and saying, 'Oh, by the way, I can't do this because of some budget document?'" Woodward said. "Or George W. Bush saying, 'You know, I'm not going to invade Iraq because I can't get the aircraft carriers I need?'" Or even Bill Clinton saying, 'You know, I'm not going to attack Saddam Hussein's intelligence headquarters,' ... because of some budget document?" The Defense Department said in early February that it would not deploy the U.S.S. Harry Truman to the Persian Gulf, citing budget concerns relating to the looming cuts known as the sequester. "Under the Constitution, the President is commander-in-chief and employs the force. And so we now have the President going out because of this piece of paper and this agreement. 'I can’t do what I need to do to protect the country,'" Woodward said. "That’s a kind of madness that I haven't seen in a long time," he said. Woodward's harsh criticism came after he stirred controversy last weekend by calling out Obama for what he said was "moving the goal posts" on the sequester by requesting that revenue be part of a deal to avert it. Read more: businessinsider.com

To: T L Comiskey who wrote (89365)	2/27/2013 10:22:27 PM
From: longnshort	1 Recommendation Respond to of 89467

WHITE HOUSE THREATENS WOODWARD: 'YOU WILL REGRET DOING THIS'

To: T L Comiskey who wrote (89365)

2/28/2013 12:46:56 PM

From: longnshort

1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 89467

Ron Fournier: Yeah, I Got the Abusive Treatment From the WH and the Same 'You Will Regret This' Threat

by Ace Of Spades 28 Feb 2013, 8:14 AM PDT

- See more at: breitbart.com

Now National Journal reporter Ron Fournier -- whom I believe to be a liberal in good standing with his paperwork in order -- drops this tidbit:

As editor-in-chief of National Journal, I received several e-mails and telephone calls from this White House official filled with vulgarity, abusive language, and virtually the same phrase that Woodward called a veiled threat. “You will regret staking out that claim,” The Washington Post reporter was told. Once I moved back to daily reporting this year, the badgering intensified. I wrote Saturday night, asking the official to stop e-mailing me. The official wrote, challenging Woodward and my tweet. “Get off your high horse and assess the facts, Ron,” the official wrote.

I wrote back:

“I asked you to stop e-mailing me. All future e-mails from you will be on the record -- publishable at my discretion and directly attributed to you. My cell-phone number is … . If you should decide you have anything constructive to share, you can try to reach me by phone. All of our conversations will also be on the record, publishable at my discretion and directly attributed to you.” I haven’t heard back from the official. It was a step not taken lightly because the note essentially ended our working relationship.

Given that Woodward is now being called old and brokedown by David Pflouffe, and the Juicebox Mafia has picked up the "senile" message they're putting out there... I would in fact say efforts are being made to insure Woodward "regrets" having correctly reported Obama's ownership of the sequester.

Incidentally, credit where credit's due: Sexton has stayed on this subject -- ownership of the sequester -- when most people (such as myself) considered it not interesting enough to stay on.

To: T L Comiskey who wrote (89365)

3/1/2013 3:40:12 PM

From: longnshort

2 Recommendations Respond to of 89467

Jedi mindmeld lolololol obama knows nothing about our culture. dumbest President ever

To: T L Comiskey who wrote (89365)	3/4/2013 11:15:26 AM
From: longnshort	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

OBAMA GOON ADMINISTRATION BULLIES YOUNG FEMALE REPORTER, "CALLING HER THE VILEST NAMES — BITCH, C--T, A--HOLE.” I know that this does not need repeating, but if this were a Republican administration, the media would be burning the Commander-in-Chief at the stake. Instead, these tools continue to polish his knob in an advanced case of Stockholm Syndrome. They sacrifice their integrity, their objectivity, and their principles for an enemy administration whose collectivist goals theyshare. Any decent American journalist would have run the emails referred to in this article on the front page. But instead, they cover for the Stalinist tactics of the thug in the White House. Where are those goosestepping feminazis? Beat The Press NY Post, March 3, 212As coverage of last week’s flare-up between Bob Woodward and the White House devolved into the granular parsing of words and implications and extrapolations and possible intent, the larger point was roundly missed: the increasing pressure that White House correspondents feel when dealing with the Obama administration — to follow their narrative, to be properly deferential (!), to react to push-back by politely sitting down and shutting up. “The whole Woodward thing doesn’t surprise me at all,” says David Brody, chief political correspondent for CBN News. “I can tell you categorically that there’s always been, right from the get-go of this administration, an overzealous sensitivity to any push-back from any media outlet.” A brief recap: After the Washington Post ran a Woodward op-ed in which he claimed that the administration was “moving the goalposts” on the eve of the potential sequester, the veteran journalist went on to assert that economic adviser Gene Sperling said, in an e-mail, “I think you will regret staking out this claim.” While Woodward spent a lot of the week on cable news going back and forth on whether that was a threat, few reporters, if any, asked why a high-level administration official spent so much time — Sperling admittedly shouted at Woodward during a 30-minute phone call, followed by that e-mail — attempting to control an opinionexpressed in a newspaper. The answer, say former and current White House correspondents, is simple: This administration is more skilled and disciplined than any other in controlling the narrative, using social media to circumnavigate the press. On the flip side, our YouTube culture means even the slightest gaffe can be devastating, and so you have an army of aides and staffers helicoptering over reporters. Finally, this week, reporters are pushing back. Even Jonathan Alter — who frequently appears on the Obama-friendly MSNBC — came forward to say he, too, had been treated horribly by the administration for writing something they didn’t like. “There is a kind of threatening tone that, from time to time — not all the time — comes out of these guys,” Alter said this week. During the 2008 campaign swing through Berlin, Alter said that future White House presssecretary Robert Gibbs disinvited him from a dinner between Obama and the press corps over it. “I was told ‘Don’t come,’ in a fairly abusive e-mail,” he said. “[It] made what Gene Sperling wrote [to Woodward] look like patty-cake.” “I had a young reporter asking tough, important questions of an Obama Cabinet secretary,” says one DC veteran. “She was doing her job, and they were trying to bully her. In an e-mail, they called her the vilest names — bitch, c--t, a--hole.” He complained and was told the matter would be investigated: “They were hemming and hawing, saying, ‘We’ll look into it.’ Nothing happened.”

To: T L Comiskey who wrote (89365)	3/6/2013 2:07:58 PM
From: longnshort	1 Recommendation Respond to of 89467

Socialized Medicine Even Kills SocialistsJeannie DeAngelis The President of Venezuela's dependence on Cuban healthcare obviously failed him, because Hugo Chávez is dead. In a July 16, 2011 New York Times article entitled "Chávez Puts His Trust in Castro for Care," Michael Shifter, president of the Inter-American Dialogue in Washington, was quoted as saying "For Chávez, questions of trust, political loyalty and control trump all other considerations. Fidel is one of the few people in which Chávez has utter faith and trust. He is prepared to entrust his health to Fidel, even if he could get better treatment elsewhere." Notwithstanding Chávez's "utter faith and trust" in Fidel Castro and the Cuban National Health System, the Venezuelan dictator has now officially assumed room temperature. America should pay heed, because if Hugo could speak from the grave it's likely he'd say that caution should be exercised before placing all your healthcare eggs in the wrong basket. For political reasons and in order to maintain the type of secrecy propagandists require in order to retain power, Chávez chose La Habana's Centro de Investigaciones Médico Quirúrgicas ( CIMEQ) and its incompetent doctors to treat his cancer. The hard truth is that according to some, the cancer that killed Chávez, had it been diagnosed correctly, was treatable. The curious thing about all this is that Michael Moore's Cuba wasn't Chávez's only choice for healthcare. It is alleged that at a summit in Caracas, Brazil, President Dilma Rousseff told colleagues that Chávez would die as a "result of his excessive paranoia rather than as a consequence of his serious - yet treatable - cancer." Rousseff should know; she herself was successfully treated for lymphatic cancer at the Sirio-Libanese Hospital in Sao Paulo, Brazil. When Chávez refused the invitation to come to Sao Paulo for treatment, the Brazilian president even offered her country's best doctors come to Caracas to assist with his care. Chávez declined the offer and stuck it out in Cuba. Over the years, Hugo Chávez has subsidized Cuba with $5 billion annually and sent them 115,000 barrels of oil a day, both of which should have ensured him top-notch medical care. The problem is that the best that socialized medicine had to offer the ailing dictator turned out to be not quite good enough, because from the looks of things, not-quite-good-enough is the best socialized medicine has to offer - even to billionaire dictators. A Venezuelan pulmonologist living in Naples, Florida named Jose Rafael Marquina with "first-hand sources and information about the president's health," called Chávez's Cuba-care "complete disorder." Dr. Marquina explained that Cubano doctors originally misdiagnosed the nature and location of Chávez's tumor and subsequently botched two surgeries. Then, an already dire situation was compounded when Chávez was given high doses of the wrong chemotherapy drugs and steroids, which caused the tumor to "mutate," making it impossible to treat. This is how Cuban socialized medicine cared for an important bigwig? Yet, even after all that, Chávez insisted on going back to Cuba for a third surgery. That type of allegiance can only be likened to Americans going through a disastrous first term with Barack Obama and then, rather than refusing further treatment, inviting the Mad Dr. O to continue administering high doses of the wrong medicine for another four years. Marquina claims he repeatedly suggested to Chávez that he travel to the US, since in Cuba "they have no experience in these cases." Unmoved by such logic, Chávez chose to return to Cuba and the ramifications of that choice resulted in protracted suffering from an untreatable cancer, a severe respiratory infection, septic shock, mechanical respiration, excruciating pain, and premature death at 58 years of age. To this, most would say hallelujah; the world is down one socialist dictator who surely won't be missed. But what Americans should really pay heed to is Hugo Chávez's loyalty to Fidel Castro's Cuban healthcare system and what it ultimately got him. Obama loyalists might not want to admit it, but Chávez's blind faith in something that failed him bears a striking resemblance to the 'Hope and Change' crowd's unwavering faith in both the president and his vision for Obamacare. The latter group may not realize it just yet, but because of their lapse in good judgment everyone is now at risk to meet the same painful, chaotic end as Hugo. In the wake of Chávez' death, what is worth noting is that the deceased Venezuelan president reigned over a South American country, had $2 billion squirreled away, and had unlimited access to doctors Cuba considered their finest. Yet despite those formidable perks, Hugo is still very much dead - which should prove to Obamacare believers that socialized medicine couldn't even save one of the world's most dedicated socialists. Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/03/socialized_medicine_even_kills_socialists.html#ixzz2MmtA8Yir Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter \| AmericanThinker on Facebook