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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mr. Whist who wrote (85962)	11/23/2000 12:25:48 PM
From: TideGlider	Respond to of 769667

Clinton as the economic commander in chief What did Clinton do to for economics? If the Congress didn't check him we would have runaway spending. The Congress kept the economy afloat.

To: Mr. Whist who wrote (85962)	11/23/2000 12:37:29 PM
From: RON BL	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Flap come on don't be naive. Every time something goes in Bush's favor the future soar and on election night the future plummeted when Florida was called for Gore. They then soared when the state went to Bush. You can have your bias but you can't ignore reality. Gore isn't Clinton and the markets don't like him I will be heading off shortly but one last point. You and I can agree on a number of things but where we differ is on the following. We are a nation of too many people with different views. The nation is also drifting into those who want socialism and those who want capitalism. This may cause us to break apart as a nation unless we go back to the constitution and return the power to the states. That means the majority of taxes remain within the state with the federal government receiving taxes only for the functions they provide. Within that fame work those states that want socialism can act in that manner. It would be nice to see the Hollywood elitists pay 80 % of their earnings to the state of California. But I sure as hell wont be living there. If you think that this nation could not break apart you are wrong. The break up of the Soviet Union is proof of that. We cannot have 50 % of the people seeking to impose a form of government imposed upon the other half that the other half abhors. Cheers