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: Srexley who wrote (208432)12/10/2001 1:06:57 PM
From: Thomas A Watson  Respond to of 769670
 
Well Srex, when you speak of Senator teddy, one should acknowledge that Senator teddy is pretty good on the anthrax, I'm sorry I mean the facts. Here is a recent example.
Kennedy Flubs Facts in First Call to Talk Show

Screeners for the Rush Limbaugh show best be on the lookout.

Not only has Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., begun calling talk shows, he got his facts wrong during his very first foray into the medium on C-Span's Sunday Morning Journal.

Phoning in unexpectedly as "Ted from Boston," Kennedy began by touting the Democratic version of the economic stimulus program and praising C-Span guest AFL-CIO Chief John Sweeney.

But when host Steve Scully asked about Friday's Senate debate on the administration's anti-terrorist budget, Kennedy flubbed an important detail - vastly overstating the number of Americans killed in the recent spate of anthrax attacks.

"We have former Gov. Ridge saying we're going to have to spend billions of dollars next year.... The terrorists aren't waiting till next year. They're planning today." Kennedy complained.

"We've had 19 deaths because of anthrax and I think we ought to invest in what is necessary now," the leading Democrat claimed.

In fact, only five Americans have died so far as a result of anthrax infections.


newsmax.com
tom watson tosiwmee



To: Srexley who wrote (208432)12/10/2001 1:48:20 PM
From: Bald Eagle  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
RE:Just because "lawmakers disagree" does not mean that it is cut and dry that it can be interpretted different ways.

Huh? The fact that lawmakers disagree surely shows that it can be interpreted different ways since it has been.
Your sentence is contrary to logic, IMO.
If something has been done, surely that shows it can be done.