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 : Mainstream Politics and Economics -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (43564)

5/13/2013 12:13:39 PM

From: FJB

1 Recommendation Respond to of 85487

Gingrich: Obamacare Has ‘Huge Problem’ Because of Reliance on IRS from Washington Free Beacon by Washington Free Beacon Staff Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said President Obama had a “huge problem” with the fallout of the IRS targeting scandal, since Obamacare relies so heavily on that government agency. The IRS apologized Friday for what it called “inappropriate” targeting of conservative political groups with “Tea Party” or “Patriot” in their name during the 2012 election to allegedly see if they were violating tax-exempt status, but a Wall Street Journal articleMonday reported it also purposely scrutinized ones worried about government spending, debt or taxes, and those that lobbied to “make America a better place to live,” according to new details of a government probe. JOE SCARBOROUGH: Newt Gingrich, what does the President of the United States need to do today? NEWT GINGRICH: Look, he has a huge problem because Obamacare relies very heavily on the IRS. Now every American understands there are elements of the IRS that go off on their own, do what they want to. The effort now of course is to say it was low-level employees. Yet, those low-level employees apparently saw public reports that they weren’t doing what they were doing and nobody informed anyone in the IRS, let alone the Treasury. I think the president has to say he’s going to open it up totally, he’s going to demand everybody meet with Congress, go to the hearings. He’s going to fire everybody he can legally fire who has been involved in this, and they’ve got to look at changes. How can you put Obamacre under the internal revenue service? Remember, this is the administration which will not profile terrorists but profile patriots? Profile Constitutional groups? I mean, this is almost madness.

[url=]Share[/url]

To: Brumar89 who wrote (43564)	5/13/2013 12:40:42 PM
From: FJB	2 Recommendations Respond to of 85487

As Benghazi Scandal Builds, Libya Falls Apart from Rubin Reports by Barry Rubin Even as the Benghazi scandal is growing in the United States, the situation in Libya is deteriorating further. Ignoring the actual threat of revolutionary Islamist militias—and attributing problems to a video—plus the botching of the investigation of the attack—due to the cover-up–has also led to a mishandling of post-attack U.S. Libya policy. As a result, t he terrorists who murdered four Americans are going free; the group that carried out the attack is still enjoying popularity and even playing a role in running Benghazi. Libya itself was the biggest donor to the Muslim Brotherhood-led, U.S. handpicked Syrian opposition and a source of a massive outflow of arms to terrorists. Consider the Benghazi scandal from the standpoint of Benghazi–where the militia that murdered the Americans is one of the most powerful forces in the city–and Libya itself. Suppose that from the beginning on September 11, 2012, the U.S. government announced that the U.S. facility was under attack by a militia group linked to al-Qaida. It would have had to explain why it had hired members of that militia group to guard the facility, a scandal in itself. We know 100 percent that this is true but it hasn’t become an issue. Next, there might have been a rescue attempt and a fire fight between American forces and that militia group in which casualties would have occurred on both sides. Note that as far as we know the militia took no killed or wounded, meaning that in its own eyes it achieved a total victory at no cost. At any rate, the United States would then have been in a military conflict with that militia. It would have to demand that the Libyan government take action and cooperate with U.S. efforts to punish it. On one hand, that would have been a headache for the Libyan government; on the other hand, it might have brought welcome aid to suppress a troublesome militia and help in getting control of the anarchy in the country (see below). Congress would have given full bipartisan support to punishing those found responsible–by a quick and conclusive FBI investigation, including putting forces on the ground in Benghazi. In practice, U.S. policy is still acting as if it believed the attack was due to a video and not a terrorist attack! Note–and this is very important–that the scandal is not restricted to what happened on September 11, 2012, and the Washington cover-up that followed. *As a result of the cover-up there has been no effort made to punish those who we know now* to have murdered four Americans. Think of that point. You cannot punish the terrorists if you haven’t officially deemed them responsible for the attack, when an Egyptian-American provocateur, who is supposedly the real guilty party, is in prison already. Meanwhile, Libya is suffering serious problems that are undoing whatever good the Obama Administration’s intervention to overthrow the old regime achieved.** In other words, as a result of the policy failure and cover-up, Libya faces a much greater threat of a revolutionary Islamist takeover, anarchy, and even becoming an al-Qaida base. (Imagine, for comparison, the situation if the U.S. government had denied al-Qaida involvement in earlier terrorist attacks.) Here are some of the current developments in Libya where, a recent article in the Egyptian newspaper, al-Ahram, explains, “militias at the command of various ideological camps and rival interest groups” increasingly dominate the country’s politics. –“Since last week, the ministries of foreign affairs, justice and the interior in Libya have been under siege by armed militias demanding [passage of a] law that would ban all associates of the former regime from positions in government….” –There was a recent terrorist attack on the French embassy in Tripoli. –“As though the situation were not fraught enough, more than 100 policemen stormed the Ministry of Interior headquarters…where they began an open-ended sit-in to press previously voiced demands for adequate protection for the police in the course of the performance of their duties, health insurance, better job and pay conditions, and the restoration of the prestige and full rights of policemen.” –“The following day…other militia bands stormed the Ministry of Finance located in downtown Tripoli and began to assault the guards. These quickly withdrew in order to avoid a confrontation with their attackers.” –A band of armed men attacked a Ministry of Justice police vehicle that was transporting prisoners and three escort vehicles.” One prisoner was killed and several others were severely injured during the attack. –Prime Minister Ali Zeidan warned that “if the violence and security breakdown continue, the international community may be compelled to intervene.” –Despite Zeidan’s threats the militias are not scared. –The Birka Police Station in downtown Benghazi was struck by a massive explosion that destroyed the building. –In southern Libya, Chadian forces advanced 100 kilometers into Libyan territory without even encountering the Libyan armed forces. As al-Ahram remarks: “The incursion further throws into relief Libya’s weak security at a time when neither the army nor the militias are capable of controlling the country’s far-flung borders…. “Yet, it appears that the militias nevertheless have the upper hand. They are better armed than the government forces and they are also said to possess sophisticated eavesdropping equipment which they use to spy on government officials.” –As a result of the violence the German embassy has suspended operations. British Petroleum has evacuated non-essential personnel. What does this mean that NATO will return to shore up the regime it put into power? The UN resolution permitting intervention in Libya is still operative. But one additional element of the Benghazi cover-up is that it allowed the U.S. government to ignore the serious state of Libyan security. Remember that the Libyan operation was another of President Obama’s supposed successes that must be made to seem triumphant during the 2012 election.

To: Brumar89 who wrote (43564)	5/13/2013 3:15:37 PM
From: FJB	3 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 85487

In an exclusive interview with Breitbart News, straight talking Rep. Steve King (R-IA) makes a seldom heard argument that cuts to the heart of the immigration problem. Congressman King said:I was talking to someone about immigration reform and I told him what I thought was wrong with the approach on the bill. He looks at me and he says "What are you going to do? How are you going to solve this problem of eleven million illegal immigrants?" So, I gave my answer which is not a new idea; seal the border. But as I drove home that night I realized I didn't give the correct answer. My real answer is, "Why do I have to do anything to solve a problem that people created willingly for themselves?" They choose to come here illegally and live in the shadows. They are happy enough to take the risk of sneaking into the United States or overstaying their visa, sneaking around and using fraudulent documents to get a job or tapping into welfare and living here in the shadows for the balance of their lives. That was their best option; the worst would be prison or deportation. The answer to that question is: I don't have to do anything to fix that problem. I have no moral obligation to make it easier for people to stay here if they are people who broke the law to get here. That moral question isn't answered by anyone; I don't have to fix that problem. The more uncomfortable it gets for them to stay, the less problems we have. The less uncomfortable it gets, the more problems. breitbart.com

To: Brumar89 who wrote (43564)	5/13/2013 6:27:58 PM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 85487

Hormone therapy doesn't begin at 5, either. http://www.wpath.org/documents2/socv6.pd… Those are the internationally recognized Standards of Care. They are the guidelines that most therapists, doctors, surgeons and patients fpollow. They list 16 as the age at which HRT may be started. However, puberty blocking GnRH inhibitors may be started at 12 (Tanner stage 2). There are a few clinics in the US that now follow the Dutch example of treating young trans teens. At one of these clinics it's possible to start hormones as young as 14.