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


To: TigerPaw who wrote (208346)12/10/2001 9:51:24 AM
From: E. T.  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
Interviewing John
BY GEOV PARRISH
seattleweekly.com
FOR NEARLY THREE weeks now, I've been trying, unsuccessfully, to have U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft stop by my office to answer a few questions. Really, they're very quick, painless questions. He can even have a lawyer with him--this time.

I don't suspect Mr. Ashcroft of any criminal wrongdoing; indeed, I have no knowledge that he has done anything wrong at all. But based upon his age, gender, ethnicity, and religious beliefs, I believe Mr. Ashcroft could assist me in my efforts to eradicate terrorism.

Here are just a few of the questions I'd like to have Mr. Ashcroft answer:

Residence: I'd like to know where Mr. Ashcroft now lives and every other place he's ever lived in this country. I'd like to know with whom he lives and personal information regarding them, and any information that would assist in locating Mr. Ashcroft in the future.

Telephone Numbers: I'd like all telephone numbers used by Mr. Ashcroft, anyone in his family, and any close associates, including the president. That includes private lines, cell phones, pagers, beepers, and the hot line to the Kremlin.

Travel: I'd like to know what foreign countries Mr. Ashcroft has ever visited, the dates of those visits, and the reasons he went there. I'd also like to know every place he's ever visited in this country--especially big cities and landmarks--the dates, and why he was there. In particular, has he ever visited Missouri, South Carolina, Afghanistan, or Mississippi? If he's planning to leave the country after this interview, I'd like to know where he plans to go, whom he plans to contact, and for what reasons. Just wondering.

Work Life: I'd like to know everything there is to know about Mr. Ashcroft's job, including whom he associates with, the types of work he does, and how long he plans to stay in the position. What sorts of books does he read? Legal documents? Constitutional amendments?

Knowledge of Weapons: I'd like to know whether Mr. Ashcroft believes in the right to keep and bear arms, whether he has a concealed-weapons permit, and whether he or anyone he knows has access to guns or any explosives or harmful chemicals, or has any training in the development or use of such weapons. If anyone in the Department of Justice has training in the handling of firearms or any other such weapons, I'd like to know their names, the types of weapons they have training in and access to, and their relationship to Mr. Ashcroft. I'd also like to know if he knows of anyone, say, over at the Pentagon or from his days in the Senate, who is capable of developing any biological or chemical weapons such as anthrax.

Regarding the Events of Sept. 11, 2001: I'd like to know Mr. Ashcroft's private political views on United States foreign policy and whether he, or anyone he knows, thinks any aspect of it is inappropriate. Does he work with, or have any kind of personal relationship with, any- one who has ever, for any reason, been accused by any person of having committed an act of terrorism? Did he ever fly a plane into the World Trade Center? (I doubt it, but you gotta check these things.)

Reaction to Terrorism: I'd like to know whether Mr. Ashcroft has ever lauded the cause of people who seceded from and declared war upon the United States of America. Has he ever visited Fort Sumter? Has he ever spoken with individuals or organizations sympathetic to the cause of secessionists? Does he believe, due to the tenets of his religion, that certain groups of people, such as homosexuals, do not deserve legal protection from acts of violence directed against them because of who they are? Does he have any association, such as an honorary degree, from institutions that promote such beliefs based upon religious doctrine? Are these institutions tolerant of individuals, organizations, or civilizations with differing beliefs?

Of course, I'm sure Mr. Ashcroft will understand that even though many people have been detained without charges for indefinite periods recently, his cooperation in answering these questions fully and truthfully is entirely voluntary. I have only his best interests and my personal concern about his future at heart. I've already obtained much of this information on my own initiative, through reading his e-mail, listening to his phone conversations, interviewing his neighbors, and rooting through his garbage. But I'd like to see what he says. Just curious.

I'm sure that where Mr. Ashcroft comes from, having a government agent ask these sorts of invasive, personal questions, without any sort of public accountability, is, quite frankly, horrifying. Where he comes from, asking questions like these is associated with the worst kinds of abuses of governmental power. But heck, I'm not even going to keep a file or keep his name on any sort of list. Or anything. I just want to know. Since he has nothing to hide, I'm sure he'll help out.

Where I come from, knowledge is everything. Really.



To: TigerPaw who wrote (208346)12/10/2001 9:54:52 AM
From: jlallen  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
Maybe in your circle of friends, but I don't know anyone who used or uses abortion as a form of birth control. That sounds like one of Rush Limbaugh's fantasy facts.

You don't get out much, do you??

JLA



To: TigerPaw who wrote (208346)12/10/2001 10:02:12 AM
From: greenspirit  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 769670
 
DEMOS BLAME BUSH FOR RECESSION DEMOS STARTED
etherzone.com
By: Ed Henry

Does anyone know why the federal government starts its fiscal year on October first? I've tried to find out, and the closest I can come to an explanation is that back in the old days when we were an agrarian nation this was the time when all the crops had been harvested. It was safe to estimate revenue.
There's nothing to say that fiscal years can't begin and end whenever an organization wants, but it has some dire effects on a democratically elected government, particularly when we hold our national elections in November.

Every year, the government is supposed to establish the next year's budget before the end of the present fiscal year, before September thirtieth. Sometimes they fail to do so because of party differences, but even then it's not a major problem since the government has a mechanism called "continuing resolution" that comes into play. Despite what the media does to generate fear that the government might shutdown for lack of a budget, that's an extremely unlikely scenario because this mechanism allows the government to continue under the previous year's budget until a new one can be agreed upon. In 1995-96 we had shutdowns because of refusals to raise the debt ceiling, not budget problems. The government can operate all year under one continuing resolution after another.

We didn't have any problem with the budget for fiscal 2001. It was established and approved by the Clinton Administration before the fiscal year began on October 1st, 2000, but George W. Bush wasn't in Washington at the time.

Assuming office in January after a two-month election debacle and controversy, George W. Bush took over a budget already in the fourth month of fiscal 2001. One entire quarter had passed. Without a drastic upheaval to the established budget the new president was condemned to live with what the previous administration and Congress had already established. Does it then seem fair to criticize a new president for something he had nothing to do with?

That’s what the democrats are doing. Now, they are complaining that things didn't go as well under the Clinton budget that ended September 30, 2001, three weeks after the World Trade Center attack. The fiscal year ended with a mere $127 billion surplus. Way below the surplus of fiscal 2000 that yielded $237 billion in tax overcharges. The liberal press has been decrying the money loss ever since.

Going right to work on his own budget for 2002, President Bush had managed approval of the 2002 budget by May, only five months after taking office. Fulfilling a campaign promise, that budget initiated income tax reductions of $1.35 trillion over the next ten years. The democrats didn't like that either.

Immediately, the democrats started complaining about how Bush wasn't doing anything for taxpayers this year, fiscal 2001. The year where we were still using their budget and where they themselves had failed to include or even mention any kind of tax break whatsoever for people who had just paid $87 billion in income tax overcharges under the Clinton administration during fiscal 2000—no doubt, just an oversight.

Once an immediate $300 one-time rebate for all income tax payers was suggested, Tom Dashle and Dick Gephardt started trotting out single mothers who hadn't paid any income tax at all to tell national television audiences how little such a rebate would mean to them.

Some constantly boisterous democrats like Charles Rangel and Jerrod Nadler (both of New York) even started to boast about how, if taxes were going to be cut, the democrats could come up with a better plan to reduce payroll taxes. That talk didn't last long once these nitwits soon realized they were talking about killing the goose that lays their golden eggs, the granddaddy slush fund of them all. Social Security came through with $95.4 billion in extra money for them in fiscal 2000 and was in the process of bringing them another $98.7 billion at the time, for a grand total of $194.1 billion in the last two years alone.

Now, after it's clear the nation is in a recession that started two years ago and unemployment is pushing the six percent mark, these same democrats are starting to blame it all on the Bush administration and his foolhardy tax cuts. If we would just let them keep the money, they would know exactly how to spend it.

It seems that a lot of this could be avoided if we could pinpoint blame a little easier, if the government's fiscal year started in June or July instead of October. A newly elected president would have time to submit his own budget without overlap by the previous administration. And it would sure be a lot easier to finish out the last six months of the old budget, especially with the new guys having so much to do with appointments and getting their feet on the ground.

Meanwhile, cult politics will continue with arguments pro and con with the democrats again proving that when they set out to build a firing squad they form a circle.



To: TigerPaw who wrote (208346)12/10/2001 10:11:09 AM
From: Neocon  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
Abortion as Birth Control
Using abortion as birth control means that abortion is being used as a back-up method to ineffective or improperly used contraception, or no contraception is beng used at all. Of women having abortions,

42% did not use contraception during the month they became pregnant
11% never used a method of birth control
47% have had at least one previous abortion
Although there are situations in which abortion is in response to health concerns of the mother or fetus, or in response to pregnancy arising from abuse, the majority of abortions are obtained for social and financial reasons. The primary reasons given for choosing abortion are given below.

75% say that having a baby would interfere with work, school or other responsibilities
about 66% say they cannot afford a child
50% do not want to be a single parent or are having problems with their husband or partner
Using abortion as birth control is not healthy physically or psychologically, and is not a mature or responsible approach to sex. Women obtaining abortions are at higher risk for reproductive tract infections, including HIV and PID. If you are using abortion as birth control, you are encouraged to rethink your sexual decisions. You might wait on sex until you find a relationship where you could continue a pregnancy should one occur.

Source: AGI, Facts in Brief, Induced Abortion, Revised 2/2000.


brainphysics.com



To: TigerPaw who wrote (208346)12/10/2001 10:14:39 AM
From: Neocon  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
Oh, in case you are confused, the data comes from the Alan Guttmacher Institute, which is associated with Planned Parenthood.....



To: TigerPaw who wrote (208346)12/10/2001 10:37:44 AM
From: PROLIFE  Respond to of 769670
 
but I don't know anyone who used or uses abortion as a form of birth control

Abortion Clinic Chain Operator Now Pro-Life and Speaking Out

Eric Harrah was part owner of one of the nation's largest chains of abortion clinics. He recently converted to Christianity and walked away from the lucrative business of killing unborn children. Dr. Willke and Brad Mattes interviewed him regarding his involvement in the abortion industry.

Dr. W: I am curious about your function in the clinic. Were you basically a business manager, owner?

Eric: I was an owner. My first position was Director of Public Relations and then I became an owner and from there went around opening clinics – that was my biggest function with my different partners.

Brad: How did you select areas to open abortion clinics?

Eric: There were a lot of different factors that went into a decision to open a clinic. Basically, you looked in an area that didn’t have a clinic in it. You would get demographic numbers, from areas that had colleges or universities, with the amount of abortions that had taken place prior to that. If it had a high abortion rate, that would be a prime area.

Dr. W: How would you hire the abortionists?

Eric: Well, before you would even go to a town, you would usually have your doctors lined up. A lot of times, doctors would contact me. There was always some doctor somewhere in some town who was already doing abortions. Also, in larger demographic areas (metropolitan areas) it was easy to tap any number of residency programs.

Dr. W: These were residents who’d moonlight?

Eric: That was not all I hired, but that was a very nice pool to be able to select from, because they were interested. You take a resident, bring him into an abortion clinic and they work part-time, even just one day a week. They can make $75,000 a year, if not more, which is very beneficial to pay off their student loans.

Brad: How many states did you have clinics in?

Eric: About 11 or 12.

Brad: And how many abortions did your chain of abortion clinics do?

Eric: If I take all the numbers from the time I started in the abortion industry to the time I got out (10 years), we probably did about a quarter of a million total.

Hey tiggerpuss. you really think many of these were not done as birth control? you are dumber than I thought.