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.

Technology Stocks : Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (154063)	3/9/2003 8:58:33 PM
From: Tom Kearney	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 164684

"I will be very surprised if Bush is reelected at this point." Well, at least he's not screwing any interns. That we know about.

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (154063)	3/9/2003 11:03:38 PM
From: Victor Lazlo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

It's certainly a damper on an already bad economic situation. One never knows what might happen in 2004. The Dems look like they're gettting primed for a nasty primary. Al Sharpton is now the favorite among NYC Democrats. I read today where Gary Hart may even throw his hat in the Dem ring. And the leading Dem money-raiser to date, John Kerry, just found out he's actually not irish like he's been telling the Boston voters for about the last 14 years. I guess he should have spent a little less time mugging for cameras and a little more time on his geneology research. Looks like Gephart and Leiberman are both lagging on the fund raising front, which means they probably won't maek it ot the finals. It's a good bet that Cheney will bow out for 2004, and Bush looks for someone else to run with him. That could be a factor. But i do think you're on the right track re the econ. People vote their wallets.

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (154063)	3/10/2003 5:42:42 PM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

<<...For all of the Bush team's cynical and ruthless political calculations, this war will not help them stay in power...>> Why He Can't Wait by Mark Weisbrot Distributed by Knight-Ridder/Tribune Information Services Published on Monday, March 10, 2003 by CommonDreams.org "These are the actions of a regime engaged in a willful charade. These are the actions of a regime that systematically and deliberately is defying the world." That was George W. Bush talking about Iraq last week, but it describes his own regime quite accurately. Just six days earlier, the White House announced that it didn't matter if Iraq disarmed: the goal was regime change. Now there is a "willful charade" if there ever was one. In one sentence, the Bush administration admitted to the world that the whole inspection process, the arguments over whether Iraq has weapons of mass destruction or is complying with UN resolutions, were just a smokescreen. Many people had suspected as much, since "regime change" in Iraq has long been one of the Bush administration's goals. The administration had made a similar statement back in October, but then took it back, saying that if Saddam really disarmed then that would constitute a change of regime. Now the mask is off. Bush is going to war, no matter what Iraq does or does not do, no matter what weapons it has or does not have. So what if the documents that Britain and our government relied on to claim that Saddam Hussein was trying to buy uranium turned out to be a forgery? Or if those infamous aluminum tubes, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency, can't be used for nuclear weapons? None of this matters because George W. Bush has decided to invade Iraq, and he intends to do it very soon. More than the coming hot desert weather or moonless nights, he is in a hurry because he is losing support at home with each passing day. A big reason for his falling popularity at home is the economy. Last month we lost another 308,000 jobs, an enormous drop in employment, bringing the total job loss since Mr. Bush took office to more than 2 million. Manufacturing employment hit its lowest level since 1946. Democrats will soon be pointing out that, in Bill Clinton's first 25 months in office, the economy had a net gain of more than 7 million jobs. These kinds of things matter much more to most American voters than who is ruling Iraq, and the Bush team has its eyes on 2004. We have already had a recession in 2001, and the economy appears to be headed for another one. Business investment is still down about 10 percent from its peak in 2000, consumers have taken on record levels of debt and -- especially given the weak labor market -- are not very confident about the future. Our record, unsustainable trade deficit is another drag on the economy. State governments are, very painfully, trying to close a budget gap of $80 billion dollars over the next year. And while we are still feeling the effects of the stock market bubble that burst three years ago, there is another, similar bubble in housing prices. The collapse of this bubble, which may be imminent, could by itself tip the economy into recession. Meanwhile, the federal government has abdicated its own responsibility to provide some economic stimulus. The Administration is offering only what Mr. Bush's father rightfully called "voodoo economics" back in 1980: another rewriting of the tax code over the next 10 years to redistribute even more income to well-off households. The Bush team has successfully used the war since last August to displace domestic issues, thereby winning both houses of Congress and avoiding a cesspool of scandals (remember Enron? Harken Energy Corporation? Halliburton?). War is their savior, or so they hope. Their fantasy: first, the fighting is over very quickly. The media, especially television (their other savior) will rally around the war, oil prices will drop, the cloud of uncertainty that now hangs over business and consumer confidence will recede, and the economy will recover. Bush will be hailed as conquering victor. But the current troubles of the American economy will not be resolved so easily. And the post-war occupation of Iraq will likely make matters worse: everyone in the region (and most of the world) will want the U.S. troops out. Prolonged conflict, terrorism, and more clouds over the future of the world economy (oil prices, interest rates, investment) are the more likely outcome. For all of the Bush team's cynical and ruthless political calculations, this war will not help them stay in power. ____________________________________________ Mark Weisbrot is Co-Director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, in Washington D.C. (www.cepr.net) ### commondreams.org

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (154063)	3/10/2003 11:26:12 PM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 164684

Some of our best diplomatic talent is leaving... Second US diplomat quits over Iraq policy March 11 2003 AFP theage.com.au <<...A veteran US diplomat resigned today in protest over US policy toward Iraq, becoming the second career foreign service officer to do so in the past month. John Brown, who joined the State Department in 1981, said he resigned because he could not support Washington's Iraq policy, which he said was fomenting a massive rise in anti-US sentiment around the world. In a resignation letter to Secretary of State Colin Powell, Brown said he agreed with J Brady Kiesling, a diplomat at the US embassy in Athens who quit in February over President George W Bush's apparent intent on fighting Iraq. "I am joining my colleague John Brady Kiesling in submitting my resignation from the Foreign Service - effective immediately - because I cannot in good conscience support President Bush's war plans against Iraq," he said. "Throughout the globe the United States is becoming associated with the unjustified use of force," Brown said in the letter, a copy of which he sent to AFP. "The president's disregard for views in other nations, borne out by his neglect of public diplomacy, is giving birth to an anti-American century," he said. "I joined the Foreign Service because I love our country," Brown said. "Respectfully, Mr Secretary, I am now bringing this calling to a close, with a heavy heart but for the same reason that I embraced it."...>>