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: Nadine Carroll who wrote (132256)	3/17/2001 1:48:05 PM
From: DMaA	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Absolutely in context. How in the world can you know that JFK would have veered as far left as his brother if he hadn't been murdered? Have you been in communication with his ghost like Hillary and Eleanor?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (132256)	3/17/2001 3:43:31 PM
From: d.taggart	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Oh Nadine,,,,,,,, why don`t you explain for us what JFK was saying,a tax cut for all Americans meant what to you?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (132256)	3/17/2001 11:03:18 PM
From: ManyMoose	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

Nadine, I disagree. The Kennedy piece on tax reduction was in context and to the point. It was used to illustrate the benefits of cutting taxes, which are just as relevent now as they were then. It makes no difference that Jack Kennedy's sole surviving brother opposes the current proposal. He has no standing in the matter and no integrity to make me listen to his spiel.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (132256)	3/18/2001 2:30:15 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

which his sole surviving brother currently opposes His sole surviving brother is in the same class as OJ- -a murderer who got away with it. And the fact that he is JFKs brother is of no consequence. This is simply a variant of the "appeal to authority" argument. FACTS, madam, let's have some facts.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (132256)	3/18/2001 3:27:46 PM
From: greenspirit	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 769670

Quote from George Will... ------------------------------------ It is repellent to hear the political class complacently discussing tax cuts as if they are just one of three options for using the surplus, in no way morally superior to spending or debt reduction. The nation's economic product is not the government's property. The gusher of money that comprises the surplus did not well up, like oil from Spindletop in 1901, because government punched a lucky hole in the ground. The money got into the government's hands because the government extracted it from productive Americans, using tax rates that are too high because they extract too much. Judged by their projected results--large, chronic surpluses--the rates do not establish a reasonable relationship between pressing public needs, as distinct from political appetites, and the private sector's wealth-creating capacity. ---------------------------------------- Feb. 18, 2001 - from "Rational semi-exuberance", published by the Washington Post Writers Group