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

To: tejek who wrote (778357)	4/4/2014 12:19:55 AM
From: i-node	1 Recommendation Recommended By FJB Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1576588

One short month away. The CA in DC will clearly hold against plaintiffs setting up yet another Supreme Court challenge. A long shot, but there is no splitting the baby. If it went against HHS, the entire law is history. -------------- Tax-raising Affordable Care Act started in wrong house of Congress Sissel v. United States Department of Health & Human Services Status: Plaintiff appealed to the D.C. Circuit Court of Apppeals on Jul. 5, 2013. Briefing completed Dec. 20, 2013. Oral argument scheduled for May 8, 2014. Summary: Pacific Legal Foundation has launched a new constitutional cause of action against the federal Affordable Care Act. The ACA imposes a charge on Americans who fail to buy health insurance — a charge that the U.S. Supreme Court recently characterized as a federal tax. PLF’s amended complaint alleges that this purported tax is illegal because it was introduced in the Senate rather than the House, as required by the Constitution’s Origination Clause for new revenue-raising bills (Article I, Section 7). The Origination Clause argument is part of an amended complaint filed in PLF’s existing lawsuit against the ACA, Sissel v. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, pending before Judge Beryl A. Howell, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. PLF’s Sissel lawsuit was on hold while the U.S. Supreme Court considered the challenge to the ACA from the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) and 26 states, in NFIB v. Sebelius. As initially filed, PLF’s Sissel lawsuit targeted the ACA’s individual mandate to buy health insurance as a violation of the Constitution’s Commerce Clause (Article I, Section 8). The Supreme Court agreed with this position, in the NFIB ruling However, Chief Justice John Roberts, joined by four justices, characterized the ACA’s charge as a federal “tax,” because it requires a payment to the federal government from people who decide not to buy health insurance. That holding prompted PLF’s new cause of action. “If the charge for not buying insurance is seen as a federal tax, then a new question must be asked,” said PLF Principal Attorney Paul J. Beard II. “When lawmakers passed the ACA, with all of its taxes, did they follow the Constitution’s procedures for revenue increases? The Supreme Court wasn’t asked and didn’t address this question in the NFIB case. The question of whether the Constitution was obeyed needs to be litigated, and PLF is determined to see this important issue all the way through the courts.”

To: tejek who wrote (778357)	4/4/2014 10:46:00 AM
From: joseffy	1 Recommendation Recommended By FJB Respond to of 1576588

Sen. Ted Cruz Spurs Crowd to Stand Up for Religious Freedom at Liberty University Convocation

To: tejek who wrote (778357)	4/4/2014 10:46:46 AM
From: joseffy	1 Recommendation Recommended By FJB Respond to of 1576588

White Man Beaten By Mob In Detroit After Hitting Boy With Truck: Was It A Hate Crime?

To: tejek who wrote (778357)	4/4/2014 10:56:04 AM
From: Brumar89	2 Recommendations Recommended By FJB TideGlider Respond to of 1576588

Mother of Five: Obamacare Jeopardizing My Family’s Financial Future Getting hate mail, called ‘lying bitch’ by Obamacare supporters Americans for Prosperity BY: Adam Kredo April 2, 2014 4:34 pm A Michigan mother of five says that the crushing new costs associated with Obamacare have imperiled her family’s financial future and will burden the household with thousands of dollars in unexpected expenses. The uptick in costs that Shannon Wendt and her family will face in the coming years under President Barack Obama’s Affordable Care Act will strain the family’s finances and force both Shannon and her husband to work harder to bridge the fiscal gap. Wendt initially decided to discuss her plight in an ad produced by the advocacy group Americans for Prosperity, which has chronicled the negative impact of Obamacare on American families across the nation. Wendt told the Washington Free Beacon that since she first spoke about her rising healthcare costs supporters of Obama’s signature law have deluged her with “hate mail,” dubbing her a “lying bitch” and writing that “my children should be taken away.” “It is going to be a big price increase so it’s definitely something that we have to consider and figure out,” Wendt said in an interview. “We have always been really entrepreneurial and do it yourselfers … [so] that’s where we run into these problems with the increase because we don’t say, ‘Oh, who’s going to pay for this for us.’ We said, ‘We’re going to have to work a little harder, work a little smarter, and figure something out so our income can go up,’” she said. The burden of Obamacare has sparked worry and anxiety in the Wendt household. “I naively believed the president that this was going to be something that saves money for me and that’s what it looked like at first,” she explained. “We thought we’d qualify for a subsidy and get a plan that was pretty similar and had a little bit better coverage and that we’d be paying the same price. And then, lo and behold, we actually don’t qualify for a subsidy at all, and the premium is astronomical.” The Wendts were paying $221 a month to cover their family of seven. They are now paying a monthly premium of $381 under a temporary stop-gap plan that will be canceled next year, when the family is forced by law to register for an Obamacare plan. Under this new plan, the family will be forced to pay around $24,000 a year, nearly double the cost of the $12,000 they pay under their current plan, Wendt said. “Now it’s four times the premium we were paying last year and the out of pocket liability is double,” Wendt said. This will lead to overtime work for Shannon’s husband and force her to restart a jewelry business that had been on the backburner. “It’s not like, ‘Oh we’ll just create another $12,000 dollars,” she said. “It’s hard. My husband is having to think a little different and come up with different strategies” in a bid to earn the extra income needed to pay for Obamacare. Wendt said that it is “frustrating” to be called a liar by powerful Democrats such as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (Nev.), who has deemed stories like Shannon’s untrue. Additionally, “the hate mail I’m getting” from Obama’s backers “is just very sad,” she said. “Some of them say, ‘I think you’re a lying bitch,’” while others send her “long nasty e-mails how they hope I get sued, and how my children should be taken away, and how can I homeschool them, and that I’m so ignorant. I mean, just nasty things.” Wendt said these critics are trying to intimidate Obamacare critics into silence. “I do have to think a little bit, though, that it is kind of the plan of the left to just kill the messenger,” she said. “They’re calling me a liar and saying all these terrible things and calling me nasty names. It’s horrible what people will say. And you think you’ve got thick skin, but the hate feeding it is all over the social media sites and it takes time to go and delete the comments and respond to some of them that are less nasty.” Wendt said that she is braving the attacks in order to help other families who are in a similar position. “I think other people wouldn’t be able to handle that [backlash], the fear of other people when you stand up, what backlash they would get, it’s keeping people quiet,” she said, noting that she personally knows of several other Michigan families who have shared the same horror stories. “There’s got to be hundreds of thousands of families that are being affected by this,” she said. Wendt said she believes America can solve its healthcare crisis without putting the burden on hardworking average families. “This was the wrong thing,” she said. “Especially in my situation, forcing families to choose between an inexpensive plan and the doctors that they need and love on a private plan, that’s a choice you shouldn’t have to make. It didn’t have to be that way.” http://freebeacon.com/issues/mother-of-five-obamacare-jeopardizing-my-familys-financial-future/

To: tejek who wrote (778357)	4/4/2014 10:58:34 AM
From: Brumar89	1 Recommendation Recommended By FJB Respond to of 1576588

1/5 of the Middle Class Disappeared Under Obama April 3, 2014 by Daniel Greenfield 3 Comments The middle class doesn’t own a lot of banks, solar power panel manufacturers or sensitivity training centers so they haven’t done too well under Obama Inc. A sense of belonging to the middle class occupies a cherished place in America. It conjures images of self-sufficient people with stable jobs and pleasant homes working toward prosperity. Since 2008, the number of people who call themselves middle class has fallen by nearly a fifth, according to a survey in January by the Pew Research Center, from 53 percent to 44 percent. Forty percent now identify as either lower-middle or lower class compared with just 25 percent in February 2008. According to Gallup, the percentage of Americans who say they’re middle or upper-middle class fell 8 points between 2008 and 2012, to 55 percent. Obama’s mentor did campaign against middleclassness. His pupil is just making sure that Americans don’t think of themselves as middle class. TUCC promotes a “Black Value System” that encourages African Americans to patronize black-only businesses, support black leaders, and avoid becoming “entrapped” by the pursuit of a “black middle-classness” Looks like the plan is working well. Especially in the black community. http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/15-of-the-middle-class-disappeared-under-obama/

To: tejek who wrote (778357)	4/4/2014 11:11:31 AM
From: joseffy	2 Recommendations Recommended By FJB TideGlider Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576588

'Stinkburger' Is An Insight On Adolescent Presidency ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, IBD Editorial news.investors.com Fiscal catastrophe looms, thanks to out-of-control entitlement spending. But the man in charge responds to serious policy proposals like a fourth-grader. Cool, President "Stinkburger"! If the ultimate measure of a man really can be found not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but in times of challenge, then the man in the seat of power in this country falls short. If ever there was a challenge demanding patriotic cooperation across the aisle, it is the entitlement crisis. The fiscal path we are on means successive trillion-dollar deficits within the next decade, even assuming the federal government receives a high level of tax revenues. The Congressional Budget Office last year projected the national debt would increase by $6.3 trillion from 2014 to 2023; in February, the CBO revised that forecast upward to a terrifying $7.3 trillion. But when a serious Republican leader puts forward a plan that cuts $5 trillion over 10 years, while strengthening Medicare without causing disruptions to seniors currently enrolled, and forcing the White House and Congress to face the impending bankruptcy of Social Security and get to work on reforms, here is President Obama's reaction: "If they tried to sell this sandwich," he told an audience of University of Michigan students, "they'd have to call it the stinkburger, or the meanwich." This, from the president who likes to tell us after the tragic shooting of government officeholders that "only a more civil and honest public discourse can help us face up to our challenges as a nation." How civil and honest is it to respond to the seriousness of House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan with infantile sneers such as "stinkburger"? But the quip is not unlike the lack of seriousness he displayed toward concerns about our shrinking military, courtesy of his policies: "We also have fewer horses and bayonets," Obama said in one of the 2012 debates. Somewhere along the way, the youthful excitement people saw in Barack Obama, who in 2007 was making rousing statements such as, "I don't want to pit red America against blue America; I want to be the president of the United States of America," turned into puerile name-calling, which obviously falls beneath the dignity of the presidency. It may not seem like it, but "stinkburger" even fits right in with the red line Obama drew regarding the terror state of Syria's use of chemical weapons. Syrian ruler Bashar Assad knew this president wasn't serious, because he hasn't been serious about waging war in Afghanistan and Iraq, and because so much of what he has said is unserious — "You can keep your plan," "I'll work with Republicans," "We've got to be civil in politics," etc. Vladimir Putin knows he's dealing with an adolescent sensibility too, as does Iran's Ayatollah Khamenei and North Korea's Kim Jong-un. The immaturity found today within the Oval Office goes a lot further than the president's shoes scuffing up the historic Resolute Desk.