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: puborectalis who wrote (1025464)7/23/2017 12:15:09 AM
From: FJB  Respond to of 1575859
 



To: puborectalis who wrote (1025464)7/23/2017 7:21:21 AM
From: miraje4 Recommendations

Recommended By
FJB
locogringo
longnshort
majaman1978

  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1575859
 
I see that you're at it again, pubes. From Merriam-Webster..

merriam-webster.com

Definition of plagiarize

plagiarized; plagiarizing transitive verb

  • : to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own : use (another's production) without crediting the source

  • You plagiarized Nicholas Kristof with that post. Pulling pieces of his op-ed without link or attribution. Totally not cool. You keep doing that shit and one of these days you'll be getting the boot from SI.

    Here are two links from where you plagiarized that post..

    nytimes.com

    archynewsy.com



    To: puborectalis who wrote (1025464)7/23/2017 9:02:30 AM
    From: longnshort3 Recommendations

    Recommended By
    FJB
    locogringo
    Taro

      Respond to of 1575859
     
    LOL! Jill Stein Hits Democrats Over Russia Hypocrisy, Liberals GO NUTS!


    4
    SHARES
    FacebookTwitterReddit




    Liberals loved Green Party candidate Jill Stein back in December and January when she was leading the charge for recounts in key battleground states. A recent message she posted to Twitter has changed all that.

    Twitchy has the story:

    *Popcorn* Jill Stein REALLY kicked a DNC/Hillary hornets’ nest with this tweet

    The campaign of Green Party 2016 presidential candidate Jill Stein is perhaps best remembered by many for its endless fundraising for failed recount efforts. Stein’s now getting plenty of attention for something else:

    Here’s Jill Stein’s tweet:



    Follow

    Dr. Jill Stein

    ?@DrJillStein


    Unlike the Dems, I didn't sabotage Bernie Sanders in the primaries, then try to cover my tracks with ludicrous Russia conspiracy theories.

    2:45 PM - 21 Jul 2017




    14,19714,197 Retweets


    28,43628,436 likes


    Twitter Ads info and privacy

    Here are the reactions she got:



    Follow

    Jessica @JessicaGoldstei

    I honestly didn't believe she was a right-wing operative until this tweet. This is the tweet that finally did it. t.co

    10:24 AM - 22 Jul 2017




    11 Retweet


    1111 likes


    Twitter Ads info and privacy



    Follow

    Elliott Lusztig @ezlusztig

    Replying to @DrJillStein
    I can't wait to find out that you, too, are on the Kremlin payroll. I suspect that's coming. You're a fringe kook & a freak, Jill.

    10:24 PM - 21 Jul 2017




    726726 Retweets


    3,7523,752 likes


    Twitter Ads info and privacy



    Follow

    People As Places @APeopleAsPlaces

    Keep in mind the date. She's pushing the same narrative of those Russian bots. Shift focus, blame Clinton, call it a conspiracy. Says a lot. t.co

    10:15 AM - 22 Jul 2017




    22 Retweets


    22 likes


    Twitter Ads info and privacy



    Follow

    Pinche-Mooch @Pinche_Pi

    Russian stooge talking point...fuck off Jill t.co

    10:12 AM - 22 Jul 2017




    22 Retweets


    1717 likes


    Twitter Ads info and privacy



    Follow

    Random Impulse @impulse_random

    Jill Stein lives in a backwards Trumpian world where a career non-Dem losing to the overwhelmingly favored Dem candidate is "sabotage". t.co

    10:11 AM - 22 Jul 2017




    Retweets


    likes


    Twitter Ads info and privacy



    Follow

    Vitamin D @popeyepleune

    See! She's one of them!
    With all the obvious evidence, she defends him & bashes HRC.
    Unbelievable. t.co

    1:30 AM - 22 Jul 2017




    44 Retweets


    77 likes


    Twitter Ads info and privacy

    Jill Stein must be a secret agent or something! The left has lost its mind.

    RELATED ITEMS: DEMOCRATS, ELECTION 2016, JILL STEIN, LIBERAL HYPOCRISY, NEWS, POLITICS, RUSSIA



    To: puborectalis who wrote (1025464)7/23/2017 9:07:38 AM
    From: locogringo2 Recommendations

    Recommended By
    FJB
    miraje

      Respond to of 1575859
     
    Why are you posting FAKENEWS?

    "At least one leader of an American ally tells me that his government suspects that there was collusion with Moscow."

    NOPE, can't get more precise and specific than that.

    I sympathize with our counterintelligence officials, who chase low-level leakers and spies even as they undoubtedly worry that their commander in chief may be subject to Kremlin leverage or blackmail.

    WTF are you talking about? Now I see.......you are STEALING somebody's opinion or OP-ED and trying to make it appear to be yours. WHY are you so stupid to be stealing work from other people? Is that your way to cover up your ignorance?

    You have a severe problem with giving attribution to the writing and posts of other people. I think it's a definite sign of being such a failure and have zero self esteem.



    To: puborectalis who wrote (1025464)7/23/2017 9:15:45 AM
    From: longnshort2 Recommendations

    Recommended By
    FJB
    locogringo

      Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1575859
     
    NY Times Reporter Accuses White Women of Having 'Racist' Walking Habits 8 informationliberation



    To: puborectalis who wrote (1025464)7/23/2017 9:16:46 AM
    From: longnshort1 Recommendation

    Recommended By
    FJB

      Respond to of 1575859
     
    Justine Damond: Killed by “Islamophobia” 8 frontpagemag



    To: puborectalis who wrote (1025464)7/23/2017 9:19:15 AM
    From: longnshort1 Recommendation

    Recommended By
    FJB

      Respond to of 1575859
     
    Deny the Holocaust, but Don't Question Sharia? 8 gatestone



    To: puborectalis who wrote (1025464)7/23/2017 11:36:39 AM
    From: longnshort3 Recommendations

    Recommended By
    FJB
    James Seagrove
    locogringo

      Respond to of 1575859
     
    Schumer admits ‘NAMBY PAMBY’ Democrats FAILED to stand up for anything – The Right Scoop 8 scoop



    To: puborectalis who wrote (1025464)7/23/2017 12:15:29 PM
    From: longnshort  Respond to of 1575859
     
    Leaked CBO Numbers: 73% of GOP ‘Coverage Losses’ Caused By Individual Mandate Repeal Based on CBO estimates, three-fourths of the difference in health insurance coverage between Obamacare and GOP proposals can be explained by Republicans' repeal of the individual mandate. SHARE ARTICLE ON FACEBOOKSHARE TWEET ARTICLETWEET PLUS ONE ARTICLE ON GOOGLE PLUS+1 PRINT ARTICLE ADJUST FONT SIZEAA by AVIK ROY July 23, 2017 7:03 AM @AVIK In the national debate over the GOP health reform proposals, one data point has stood about above all others: the estimate, from the Congressional Budget Office, that more than 20 million people would “lose” coverage as a result. And there’s been an odd consistency to the CBO’s projections. Do you want to repeal every word of Obamacare and replace it with nothing? CBO says 22 million fewer people would have health insurance. Do you prefer replacing Obamacare with a system of flat tax credits, in which you get the same amount of assistance regardless of your financial need? CBO says 23 million fewer people would have health insurance. Do you prefer replacing Obamacare with means-tested tax credits, like the Senate bill does, in which the majority of the assistance is directed to those near or below the poverty line? CBO says 22 million fewer people would have health insurance. 22 million, 23 million, 22 million—these numbers are remarkably similar even though the three policies I describe above are significantly different. Why is that? Thanks to information that was leaked to me by a congressional staffer, we now have the answer. Nearly three-fourths of the difference in coverage between Obamacare and the various GOP plans derives from a single feature of the Republican bills: their repeal of Obamacare’s individual mandate. But the CBO has never published a year-by-year breakout of the impact of the individual mandate on its coverage estimates. But CBO has developed its own estimates of that impact, during work it did last December to estimate the effects of repealing the individual mandate as a standalone measure. Based on those estimates, of the 22 million fewer people who will have health insurance in 2026 under the Senate bill, 16 million will voluntarily drop out of the market because they will no longer face a financial penalty for doing so: 73 percent of the total. As you can see in the above chart, two factors—repealing Obamacare’s individual mandate and the CBO’s outdated March 2016 baseline—explain nearly all of the CBO-scored coverage difference between GOP bills and Obamacare. It’s why the various Senate tweaks to the Better Care Reconciliation Act—repealing fewer of Obamacare’s tax hikes, say, or throwing $45 billion at opioid addiction—have no impact on the CBO’s coverage estimates. Some Republicans advocate starting over and writing an entirely new Obamacare replacement that can get a better CBO score. But any replacement that repeals the individual mandate will be scored by the CBO as covering at least 16 million fewer people—and probably worse. GOP moderates, in particular, have been intimidated by the CBO coverage scores, expressing reluctance to vote for a plan that “takes coverage away” from so many. But if the only reason you’ve stopped buying insurance is because the government is no longer fining you for doing so, nobody has “taken away” your coverage. It’s time for those moderates to choose. Do you support Obamacare’s individual mandate? If you do, then no GOP replacement will ever satisfy you. If you oppose the individual mandate, and would vote for its repeal, then you should ignore at least three-fourths of the CBO’s coverage score. The CBO has left us with no middle ground. Read more at: nationalreview.com

    Read more at: nationalreview.com

    Read more at: nationalreview.com