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: Land Shark who wrote (936095)5/20/2016 4:36:07 PM
From: tntpal1 Recommendation

Recommended By
FJB

  Respond to of 1576346
 
The liberal Clintons don't even know what the word "is" means.
In their liberal doublespeak "Is" can mean anything you want it to be...



Bill Clinton and the Meaning of "Is"
The distinction between "is" and "was" was seized on by the commentariat when Clinton told Jim Lehrer of PBS right after the Lewinsky story broke, "There is no improper relationship." Chatterbox confesses that at the time he thought all these beltway domes were hyperanalyzing, and in need of a little fresh air. But it turns out they were right: Bill Clinton really is a guy who's willing to think carefully about "what the meaning of the word 'is' is." This is way beyond slick. Perhaps we should start calling him, "Existential Willie."

slate.com

--------------------------------------------------------------

Regardless Trumps quote is as follows & he only says that it looks like a terrorist attack
:
Looks like yet another terrorist attack. Airplane departed from Paris. When will we get tough, smart and vigilant? Great hate and sickness!” the presumptive Republican nominee tweeted early Thursday.

nypost.com



To: Land Shark who wrote (936095)5/20/2016 4:56:17 PM
From: jlallen3 Recommendations

Recommended By
Honey_Bee
locogringo
tntpal

  Respond to of 1576346
 
And what Trump said was "looks like"...not is, Mooseboy.

LOL!



To: Land Shark who wrote (936095)5/20/2016 9:03:53 PM
From: Tenchusatsu  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1576346
 
Sharkie,
There is a big difference between a definitive "is" and words like "Seems like" and "appears to be"
When caught in a self-contradiction, liberals always resort to the "but, but, it's different" excuse.

Tenchusatsu



To: Land Shark who wrote (936095)5/20/2016 9:23:35 PM
From: Broken_Clock  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1576346
 
Hillary and his menopausal cohorts are going to bring the Dems down in flames. She can't even bring unity in her own party. Then again, throwing real progressives under the Wall St. bus she's driving is going to attract Republican voters, not real left leaning Dems.
+++

May 20, 2016, 03:54 pmArmy of Sanders supporters fuming over Wasserman Schultz

By Lisa Hagen

AddThis Sharing Buttons
2.7K


4068



Getty Images

Bernie Sanders supporters aren’t fond of Hillary Clinton.

But they really don’t like Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the Democratic National Committee chairwoman and Florida lawmaker.

Sanders supporters blame Wasserman Schultz for what they see as system rigged against their candidate and say he is being cheated by contests closed to independents and unfair weight to superdelegates. “I think I’m honestly starting to hate @DWStweets more than @realDonaldTrump,” one Sanders supporter tweeted on Thursday, with the hashtag #FeelTheBern.

Other hashtags being used by Sanders supporters on Thursday included #DebbieDowner, #DownwithDebbie and #DumpDebbie.

The online anger erupted this week after Wasserman Schultz called on Sanders to get his supporters in line after a rowdy Nevada Democratic convention where Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) endured a hearty booing. Wasserman Schultz also criticized death threats and obscene messages left on the voicemail of the chairwoman of the Nevada state party.

Sanders was defiant and defended his supporters. While he criticized any violence in Nevada, he blamed much of the trouble on the Democratic Party.

That provoked more criticism from Wasserman Schultz.

“Unfortunately, the senator’s response was anything but acceptable. It certainly did not condemn his supporters for acting violently or engaging in intimidation tactics and added more fuel to the fire,” she said on CNN.

Sanders campaign manager Jeff Weaver then offered a sharp response, saying Wasserman Schultz has “been throwing shade at the Sanders campaign since the very beginning.”

Wasserman Schultz fired back in a terse response on CNN: "My response to that is hashtag SMH,” an acronym for "shaking my head."

The feud between Wasserman Schultz and Sanders has been going for some time.

The Sanders campaign has criticized a DNC debate schedule that put contests on weekend nights, when they were less likely to garner viewers.

Late last year, Sanders sued the DNC after the party briefly blocked the Sanders campaign's access to party files and data following a report that Sanders staffers had improperly accessed Clinton's campaign information.

The Sanders campaign dropped the lawsuit in late April.

Two weeks ago, Sanders sent a letter to the chairwoman accusing the party for giving Clinton supporters more committee representation at the July convention. Wasserman Schultz denied that the DNC is favoring the former secretary of State.

Wasserman Schultz has rebutted her critics' claims that she's tilting the primary in Clinton's favor.

“The Democratic National Committee is neutral when it comes to this primary,” she told MSNBC's Rachel Maddow earlier this week.

And she has argued that the specific rules for this election have been in place before the cycle even began.

“The rules governing the Democratic Party delegate selection process have been in place for decades, and the specific procedures for this cycle were agreed upon in 2014,” she said in a Tuesday statement.

“In Nevada on Saturday, the state party’s credentials committee was made up of an equal number of members representing both campaigns. That’s a testament to our party’s fundamental belief in being inclusive, open to the public and transparent.”

Liberal groups such as Credo, Moveon.org and RootsAction have posted online petitions calling for Wasserman Schultz to resign from the DNC.

Credo was angered by an interview the DNC chair gave in January to The New York Times in which she accused young women of “complacency” about reproductive rights. The liberal group charged that she has “repeatedly failed to act in the best interests of progressives and the Democratic Party.”

To date, Credo's petition has more than 87,000 signatures, which is 13,000 short of its 100,000 signature goal.

A petition from Moveon.org to remove Wasserman Schultz, who the group says has “ulterior motives” in the race, has more than 77,000 signatures. RootsAction surpassed its goal of 35,000 signatures on a petition to remove Wasserman Schultz.

Liberal commentator Van Jones said this week on CNN that he’d prefer Reince Priebus, Republican National Committee chairman, over Wasserman Schultz after a “leadership failure” for Democrats.

“Debbie, who should be the umpire, who should be the marriage counselor, is coming in harder for Hillary Clinton than she is for herself. That is malpractice,” Jones told CNN's Brooke Baldwin Wednesday.

And Mika Brzezinski, the co-host on MSNBC's “Morning Joe,” said the DNC chair should “step down,” condemning the party’s treatment of Sanders since he entered the race.

“This has been very poorly handled from the start. It has been unfair, and they haven’t taken him seriously, and it starts, quite frankly, with the person we just heard speaking. It just does. You know that,” Brzezinski said about Wasserman Schultz.

A former DNC official noted that party members selected Wasserman Schultz as DNC chair and said that it's easy for campaigns to shift the blame onto her since she's the face of the party.

“Something that’s getting lost in a lot of this discussion is that Debbie Wasserman Schultz is a democratically elected chair of the party,” said Holly Shulman, a former DNC spokeswoman and now Democratic consultant. “Democrats elected her to lead the party, and that’s what she’s doing.

“Chairwoman Wasserman Schultz is an easy scapegoat for each campaign who has complaints about how their own campaigns are being run or the traction that they’re not getting," she added.

Clinton is almost certain to be the Democratic nominee given her lead, and Sanders has come under fire from the left this week for some of his criticisms of Clinton and for insisting that he really does have a path to the nomination.

A major credit card issuer upped the ante with an unbelievable 21-month intro 0% APR offer that has you paying no interest until 2018 Read More

There are some signs the DNC is trying to make some kind of concessions to Sanders. The party reportedly will offer Sanders seats on a key platform committee at the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia in July, which could help him inject his own policy proposals into the party's platform, including a $15 federal minimum wage and a single-payer healthcare system.

Still, the back-and-forth between Clinton, Sanders and Wasserman Schultz has some wondering if the party can come together to wage a strong battle against a common enemy: Donald Trump, the presumptive GOP nominee.

“I’d say the effort for party unity is not going very well,” Democratic strategist Brad Bannon said in an interview with The Hill. “It’s definitely a threat to the nominee, which is probably going to be Hillary Clinton.”



To: Land Shark who wrote (936095)5/20/2016 9:27:09 PM
From: Broken_Clock  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1576346
 
This is another prime example….
++++

Published on

Friday, May 20, 2016

by
Common Dreams

Establishment Dems Fight to Defeat 'Medicare-for-All' in Colorado

Pro-Clinton Democrats join Big Pharma and state Republicans in fighting to defeat first-in-the-nation ballot measure for statewide single-payer plan
by
Nika Knight, staff writer

15 Comments



Prominent Colorado Democrats, including Gov. John Hickenlooper, pictured above, have co-opted the Republican Party's stance and worked to defeat the state's ballot measure for universal, government-run healthcare. (Photo: AP)

Highlighting the divisions in the Democratic party this election, Colorado's ballot measure for a universal, single-payer healthcare plan is facing unexpected resistance from the very same party that has been calling for such a healthcare plan since the 1990s.

"There is a disconnect between the powers that be and the people," said state senator Irene Aguilar, a former doctor and the chief architect of the statewide 'Medicare-for-all,' called ColoradoCare, in an interview with the Guardian. "The powers that be are incrementalists. There hasn't been a courage of conviction to try and deal with [healthcare coverage]."

If it passes, ColoradoCare would make Colorado the first state in the nation with universal healthcare.

Most Americans support replacing Obamacare with a single-payer system, and Bernie Sanders has made his support for universal healthcare a central pillar of his presidential campaign. His rival Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, continues to support the least popular position of maintaining the Affordable Care Act (ACA) with only incremental and modest changes.

Clinton's position is echoed by establishment Democrats in Colorado, including Clinton supporter and former governor Bill Ritter, who argued to the Guardian that ColoradoCare was not "practical or feasible."

"Colorado could lead the nation in moving toward a system to ensure better health care for more people at less cost."
—Sen. Bernie SandersJohn Hickenlooper, the state's current governor another prominent pro-Clinton Democrat, said in a statement, "Our reforms are just beginning to bear fruit and it would be premature to dramatically remake our health care system at this time."

(Hickenlooper is in fact so close to Clinton that he may be on the campaign's shortlist for a vice presidential pick, according to The Hill.)

Clinton's campaign is directly linked to Coloradans for Coloradans, the most prominent organization opposing ColoradoCare. Formed solely to defeat the measure, Coloradans for Coloradans is being funded by the very same consultant firm currently working for the Clinton super PAC Priorities USA, as Lee Fang reported in the Intercept.

While a stance for the ACA and against single payer is the least popular with the public, it is the most popular within a certain sector of the population: pharmaceutical and healthcare companies.


Indeed, in Colorado the "anti-single-payer effort is funded almost entirely by health care industry interests," Fang reported, "including $500,000 from Anthem Inc., the state’s largest health insurance provider; $40,000 from Cigna, another large health insurer that is current in talks to merge with Anthem; $75,000 from Davita, the dialysis company; $25,000 from Delta Dental, the largest dental insurer in the state; and $100,000 from SCL Health, the faith-based hospital chain."

Moreover, Clinton herself " has received $13.2m in donations from the health sector over the years, according to nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. This well-funded industry is also the chief financial backer of the effort to destroy ColoradoCare," notes the Guardian.

"There is huge money from the [health insurance] industry involved in financing not only the campaign against ColoradoCare, but also in financing the politicians who decide on health care legislation," Owen Perkins, communications director for ColoradoCareYes, a group advocating for the ballot measure, told the Guardian.

"The role that big money, big medicine plays in funding campaigns and influencing political votes is certainly a good reason to take [healthcare] out of the insurance industry and politicians and put it in the hands of the people," Perkins added.

While the health sector pours funds into the fight against single payer, ColoradoCareYes told the Guardian that their fight for universal healthcare is being funded largely by small, individual donors—much like Sanders' presidential run, which has made its average donation of $27 into a touchstone of the campaign.

Sanders himself has lent support to the ballot measure. In a statement to the Colorado Independent, Sanders said, "Colorado could lead the nation in moving toward a system to ensure better health care for more people at less cost. In the richest nation on earth, we should make health care a right for all citizens. No one should go bankrupt or skip getting the care they need because they cannot afford it."

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License



To: Land Shark who wrote (936095)5/21/2016 9:47:49 AM
From: longnshort1 Recommendation

Recommended By
TideGlider

  Respond to of 1576346
 
Shut Up, America! Portland Schools Ban Books Questioning Climate Change
Dissent is not allowed in today’s politically correct left-wing nation. The liberals will use anything at all to condemn dissenting opinions. Portland school district has banned any books in their system that question the pseudo-science called climate change.

The push was led by Mike Rosen, who is also leads a program for environmental curriculum standards. He reportedly “put his work on hold.”

“IT IS UNACCEPTABLE THAT WE HAVE TEXTBOOKS IN OUR SCHOOLS THAT SPREAD DOUBT ABOUT THE HUMAN CAUSES AND URGENCY OF THE CRISIS. CLIMATE EDUCATION IS NOT A NICHE OR A SPECIALIZATION, IT IS THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT FOR MY GENERATION TO BE SUCCESSFUL IN OUR CHANGING WORLD.” GABY LEMIEUX, PORTLAND HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT

The party line is so entrenched in these kids that it will never be removed. They believe a lie, and there will be no way to change it.

Yes, America, Climate Change is a religion.

HYPOCRISY

When parents complain about books for their children, many times nothing is done about them. In fact, Portland schools actually have a “Banned Book Week,” where they have “important discussions” about censorship and encourage students to read books that were banned in years past. Bet you money they won’t do that for these books.

These books have been banned over the years from various places. Will Portland ask students to read anything against climate change?CENSORSHIP AND INTIMIDATION

The concept of “free-thinking” is dead. The concept of imagination is dead. Truth is dead.

So we have schools who fire people if they don’t want men in the women’s bathrooms. Even if they are well-liked and have been there for years, dissent means the axe.

You can’t say anything against Muslims or gays, or transgenders that they don’t like. Don’t say anything, if you do we’ll brow-beat you, sue you and tell everyone how evil you are. You won’t be able to even get on an airplane because we’ll make YOU look like the terrorist.

Schools have banned the American flags or US Marine symbols from student’s T-shirts. They ban students for free thinking and imagination all the time. (Unless they’re a Muslim kid who makes a bo–clock.)

There is no free dialogue in America. With this passage of book censorship, Portland has proven that they are the nazis in disguise. What’s next, banning AND burning?

Nazi Book burning, 1933



To: Land Shark who wrote (936095)5/21/2016 10:17:13 AM
From: longnshort1 Recommendation

Recommended By
FJB

  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1576346
 
DiCaprio takes private jet extra 8,000 miles to collect environmental award 8 fox



To: Land Shark who wrote (936095)5/21/2016 10:54:59 AM
From: longnshort2 Recommendations

Recommended By
dave rose
FJB

  Respond to of 1576346
 
Krugman Flunks Basic Labor Economics - Cafe Hayek 8 hayek