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: gronieel2 who wrote (857779)	5/17/2015 11:54:12 AM
From: Wharf Rat	Respond to of 1574631

*the state is building a short (25-mile) stretch of high-speed rail tracks from Fresno to Madera.* Ya gotta start somewhere. Once upon a time, the feds completed a short stretch of high speed roads, in Nowhere, Mo. On August 13, 1956, Missouri awarded the first contract based on new Interstate Highway funding, this work began on US 40 (now I-70) in St. Charles County. [12]tm en.wikipedia.org

To: gronieel2 who wrote (857779)	5/17/2015 12:02:33 PM
From: longnshort	Respond to of 1574631

yeah then we can lose billions on the national airline like we do on the nat rail and nat healthcare. only the gov could lose money with a monopoly. how about a National computer company, national food company, one national beer, one national wine, one national fast food god we could be just like Cuba

To: gronieel2 who wrote (857779)	5/17/2015 12:08:26 PM
From: longnshort	1 Recommendation Recommended By Brumar89 Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574631

and Boxer's husband bought a lot of the land around those trains stops 20 years ago, or should I say Boxer had those train stations put where her husband's land was. What a coincidence, ah the dems caring about the people

To: gronieel2 who wrote (857779)	5/17/2015 12:18:24 PM
From: longnshort	Respond to of 1574631

The Silencing: How the Left is Killing Free Speech Hardcover – May 11, Lifelong liberal Kirsten Powers blasts the Left's forced march towards conformity in an exposé of the illiberal war on free speech. No longer champions of tolerance and free speech, the "illiberal Left" now viciously attacks and silences anyone with alternative points of view. Powers asks, "What ever happened to free speech in America?"

To: gronieel2 who wrote (857779)	5/17/2015 12:24:40 PM
From: longnshort	Respond to of 1574631

In a 2014 speech, Floyd Abrams, one of the nation’s top First Amendment scholars, himself a lifelong liberal, noted, “It stuns me how many people—educated people, including scholars—seem to believe that the First Amendment should be interpreted as nothing but an extension and embodiment of their generally liberal political views.” He told me in an interview, “It is accurate to say that … conservative jurists have moved strongly in the direction of more First Amendment protection and liberal jurists have moved markedly in the other direction.” Abrams founded the Floyd Abrams Institute for Freedom of Expression at Yale Law School and noted that of the liberal legal scholars who come to his center, most view the First Amendment as an impediment to progressive policy goals. He says, “Their definition of liberalism is so imbued with their devotion to egalitarianism that they are willing to pay some First Amendment prices to get there.” Cornell Law School professor Steven H. Shiffrin is a leading scholar of the First Amendment and co-author of a widely used First Amendment casebook. He is also an evangelist for the new progressive view of the First Amendment. Shiffrin gave a 2014 lecture called “The Dark Side of the First Amendment” in which he proclaimed, “The First Amendment is at odds with human dignity” and complained that racist speech was protected despite “its undermining of racial equality.” University of Chicago Law School professor Eric Posner expressed a similar contempt for free speech when he wrote in Slate, “For the left, the [First] amendment today is like a dear old uncle who enacted heroic deeds in his youth but on occasion says embarrassing things about taboo subjects in his decline.” The time had come to put the nutty uncle back in the attic. Posner was writing in the wake of the riots in the Middle East attributed to a YouTube video. He expressed dismay that the U.S. government was prevented by U.S. law “from restricting the distribution of a video that causes violence abroad and damages America’s reputation.” As he wrote, “The rest of the world—and not just Muslims—see no sense in the First Amendment.” Posner and Shiffrin are influential legal scholars and they are not alone in their views. Their intolerance of free speech that leads to what they deem the wrong policy conclusions or offends the wrong people is frankly typical of the illiberal left. Today’s progressive legal policy is less likely to treat the First Amendment as a bulwark against government infringement on the free expression of Americans than a roadblock to a progressive ideological agenda. “What’s coming up through the pipeline should have everyone who cares about freedom of speech very concerned,” FIRE’s President Greg Lukianoff, a graduate of Stanford Law School, told me in an interview. “I’m afraid that a lot of these more tenuous theories that law schools have come up with—that have grown up on campuses—that allow them to punish speech they dislike, while protecting speech they like are going to have increasing presence on the bench at every level and, I’m afraid, eventually on the Supreme Court.” The more suppressive view of free speech seems to be gaining currency more broadly, especially among younger Americans. According to the 2013 First Amendment Center annual survey, “This year there was a significant increase in those who claimed that the First Amendment goes too far in protecting individual rights.”