SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: tejek who wrote (724431)7/4/2013 12:27:29 AM
From: d[-_-]b3 Recommendations

Recommended By
Brumar89
FJB
joseffy

  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 1576709
 
Obama is doing brilliant things like showing them gay marriage - not saving people from aids.

He also supported voter ID laws in Africa - but not at home - because he knows American blacks are too dumb to get ID.



To: tejek who wrote (724431)7/4/2013 10:14:05 AM
From: joseffy  Respond to of 1576709
 
ObamaCare Unraveling: Torn Asunder By Its Own Contradictions



To: tejek who wrote (724431)7/4/2013 10:14:31 AM
From: joseffy  Respond to of 1576709
 
Ted Cruz: Obama’s Egypt policy a ‘stunning diplomatic failure’



To: tejek who wrote (724431)7/4/2013 10:16:01 AM
From: joseffy  Respond to of 1576709
 
If you have to keep delaying provisions of your super-duper law (ObamaCare), it probably sucks. A lot.



To: tejek who wrote (724431)7/4/2013 11:00:31 AM
From: joseffy  Respond to of 1576709
 
IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.....
The declaration of Independence ^ July 4, 1776


The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,


When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good. He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them. He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only. He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures. He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people. He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within. He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands. He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers. He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries. He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance. He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures. He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power. He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation: For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us: For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States: For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world: For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent: For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury: For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies: For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments: For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever. He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us. He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people. He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation. He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands. He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

The 56 signatures on the Declaration appear in the positions indicated:

Column 1 Georgia: Button Gwinnett Lyman Hall George Walton

Column 2 North Carolina: William Hooper Joseph Hewes John Penn South Carolina: Edward Rutledge Thomas Heyward, Jr. Thomas Lynch, Jr. Arthur Middleton

Column 3 Massachusetts: John Hancock Maryland: Samuel Chase William Paca Thomas Stone Charles Carroll of Carrollton Virginia: George Wythe Richard Henry Lee Thomas Jefferson Benjamin Harrison Thomas Nelson, Jr. Francis Lightfoot Lee Carter Braxton

Column 4 Pennsylvania: Robert Morris Benjamin Rush Benjamin Franklin John Morton George Clymer James Smith George Taylor James Wilson George Ross Delaware: Caesar Rodney George Read Thomas McKean

Column 5 New York: William Floyd Philip Livingston Francis Lewis Lewis Morris New Jersey: Richard Stockton John Witherspoon Francis Hopkinson John Hart Abraham Clark

Column 6 New Hampshire: Josiah Bartlett William Whipple Massachusetts: Samuel Adams John Adams Robert Treat Paine Elbridge Gerry Rhode Island: Stephen Hopkins William Ellery Connecticut: Roger Sherman Samuel Huntington William Williams Oliver Wolcott New Hampshire: Matthew Thornton



To: tejek who wrote (724431)7/4/2013 11:09:32 AM
From: joseffy  Respond to of 1576709
 
How the hell were they supposed to know that a guy named "Zimmerman" could be half hispanic and a quarter black? They just assumed he'd be as white as Robert Byrd's pajamas. That threw a monkey wrench into their plans right from the start, and they never fully recovered.



To: tejek who wrote (724431)7/4/2013 11:12:39 AM
From: joseffy1 Recommendation

Recommended By
steve harris

  Respond to of 1576709
 
The Egyptian people are now wise to Obama, Hilliary Clinton and Huma and the Muslim Brotherhood crew. It’s about time that the American people wake up also.



To: tejek who wrote (724431)7/4/2013 11:22:32 AM
From: joseffy  Respond to of 1576709
 
Lois Lerner’s price for testimony: Immunity
........................................................................................
By: Rachael Bade and John Bresnahan July 2, 2013
politico.com

<More Here>

Embattled IRS official Lois Lerner will not testify before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee unless she’s given immunity from prosecution, her lawyer told POLITICO
Tuesday.

“They can obtain her testimony tomorrow by doing it the easy way … immunity,” William W. Taylor III said in a phone interview. “That’s the way to resolve all of this.” The comments reflect the hard-line approach Lerner, the former head of the IRS division that scrutinized conservative groups, and her legal team are taking in defending her role in the agency’s scandal.

Taylor, a founding partner of Zuckerman Spaeder LLP, is even shrugging off the possibility that the full House might vote to hold Lerner in contempt. “None of this matters,” he said. “I mean, nobody likes to be held in contempt of Congress, of course, but the real question is one that we’re fairly confident about, and I don’t think any district judge in the country would hold that she waived.”

The oversight panel voted along party lines last week that Lerner waived her Fifth Amendment rights at a May 22 hearing when she boldly declared her innocence in the IRS scandal and said she violated no laws — then invoked her constitutional protections to ward off self-incriminating questions from lawmakers. Republicans immediately argued that Lerner forfeited her Fifth Amendment right by speaking and they should be allowed to question her opening statement. Legal experts disagree about whether she actually did.

But in the eyes of the committee, Lerner — who was placed on administrative leave after refusing the new IRS leader’s request to resign — is obligated to now answer questions related to her earlier statement. “The committee is entitled to Ms. Lerner’s full and truthful testimony without further conditions,” said panel spokesman Frederick Hill in a statement to POLITICO. “If, however, Ms. Lerner’s attorney is interested in discussing limited immunity, the committee will listen.” Rep. Jim Jordan (Ohio), a senior oversight Republican helping oversee the IRS investigation, said the panel is still hopeful she’ll come to the committee on her own free will, arguing that questions of immunity and contempt are “down the road.”

“We hope she comes in and gives us the truth and answers questions,” Jordan said in a brief phone interview Tuesday. “If that doesn’t happen, then you cross the next bridge. … If she says, ‘No, I’m going to come in and assert my Fifth Amendment rights again and not going to speak,’ then you think about what the other options are.” Oversight Republicans have not yet decided when or how to recall Lerner, but if she refuses to answer questions on her proclamation of innocence, they say she could face contempt charges.

Taylor, however, said he is not afraid of that threat and is willing to take the issue to federal court if necessary.

(snip)

<More Here>



To: tejek who wrote (724431)7/4/2013 11:26:54 AM
From: joseffy1 Recommendation

Recommended By
FJB

  Respond to of 1576709
 
Military Leaders Oppose Samantha Power for U.N. Ambassador

Nearly 50 military leaders, national security officials urge Senate in letter to reject nomination

The Washington Free Beacon BY: Adam Kredo July 3, 2013

Excerpt:

Nearly 50 former military leaders and national security officials urged the Senate on Wednesday to reject the controversial nomination of Samantha Power as the next U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.


Power, a longtime Obama confidante and Harvard University professor, was tapped for the position earlier this year.

Her nomination quickly drew criticism from former military brass and pro-Israel leaders who say that Power has a history of leveling harsh criticism at the Jewish state, as well as advocating in favor of an American apology tour at the U.N.

“In light of her low regard for our country, her animus towards one of our most important allies, Israel, and her affinity for those who would diminish our sovereignty and strengthen our adversaries, we consider her to be a wholly unacceptable choice for this sensitive post and urge you to reject this nomination,” the officials wrote to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.).

The former military officials and pro-Israel leaders warned that Power will seek to dampen U.S. influence at the U.N. and use her post to back the international body’s anti-Israel agenda.

“Samantha Power’s decades-long track record makes clear that she neither embraces these principles [of freedom] nor is disposed to play this important role in advancing them,” the letter states.

The officials, among them former Navy Admiral James A. “Ace” Lyons and Army Lt. Gen. William Boykin, warned that Power will seek to subvert U.S. interests and kowtow to hostile nations.

“Almost since its inception, the United Nations has been dominated by member states, organizations and personalities who share Dr. Power’s sentiments,” the letter states. “We do not need to add to their number – especially as the representative of the American people – someone who shares their transnationalist agenda, with all that implies for our interests and freedoms,” the letter states.

Several of Power’s fiercest critics gathered at the National Press Club on Wednesday morning to publicly reject the nomination and urge the Senate to do the same.

Gen. Boykin, a former Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence, said that Power wants to position the U.N. as a global governing body.

“Samantha Power’s attitude that we need to cede our sovereignty to the U.N. is very misguided and is very dangerous as far as I’m concerned,” Boykin said. “Maintaining our sovereignty and our pride at being Americans are fundamental to our future.”

“What she would really like to do is cede our authority to that international body,” he warned, referring to Power’s writings criticizing the U.S. military and its role in the world.

“I’ve given enough of my life to this country that I have the privilege and liberty to stand up and say I oppose her and oppose her on the grounds of U.S. sovereignty,” Boykin said.

Frank Gaffney, a former assistant defense secretary in the Reagan administration, said that as the July 4th holiday approaches, Americans should keep in mind that Power has been “harshly critical” of American policies.

Power has been “harshly critical over a long period of time of our country,” said Gaffney, head of the Center for Security Policy, which organized the anti-Power letter and press conference.

“Her position is easily confused with that of people who are actually enemies of the U.S. when it comes to the character of the country and its role in the world,” Gaffney said.

Former Rep. Allen West (R., Fla.) agreed that Power has “shown a disdain for American power” and a “great disdain for our ally, the state of Israel.

West went on to describe Power as a “loyal Obama acolyte” who has “no diplomatic capabilities.”

“Miss Power is an über-left militant progressive whose previous statements against America and Israel should cause us concerns,” West said. “But perhaps she is the ideal” candidate for the Obama administration, which has come under fire for other controversial appointments, such as that of Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel.

*snip*

Full Story