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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Value Investing -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jeffbas who wrote (16831)	4/12/2003 11:48:57 AM
From: TimbaBear	Respond to of 78648

jeffrey bash Thank you so much for spewing back the media line, I really wasn't getting enough of it from the US media. The previous terrorist incidents were all the more reason for any (gee, that does include this one too)administration to have been on heightened alert, and yet they weren't. The WTC bombing in 1993 and subsequent attacks on overseas USA targets were essentially ignored by the Clinton/Gore Administration. Were they now? Let's see, since you love the party line, then the approach is: Say it often enough and it must be true, right? As far as 25 million Iraqis are concerned you mean kind of like what is shown in this photo? informationclearinghouse.info I'm not proposing these people's point of view, just wondering why all the real journalism is now relegated to op-ed pieces now? With the exception of some small pockets of folks in Baghdad, all the jubilation seems to be coming from either the Kurds or the looters (by the way, another example of great administration foresight). As far as 9/11 goes, since I live in the neighborhood and knew folks who were killed, I find your view reprehensible. Living in the area gives you no moral imperative. I live in the same country that this was allowed to happen to some of the best and the brightest. What I find reprehensible is the attitude you display about trying to find the facts. It should be obvious that the subsequent dozen cuts in rates and large tax cut were the right measures. And just why should that be obvious? Market performance since then perhaps? The strengthening of the US economy since then perhaps? The exploding US deficit perhaps? Why should tax cuts proposed based on bogus 10 year pie-in-the sky projections have any better chance of being positive for an economy than business plans and numbers based on falsity? The military cutbacks you allude to were started right after the cold war ended. The current party in power has controlled Congress since 1994. If I remember right, their priority was in vilifying a President for lying about an affair. That surely did seem more important to them than America's security here or abroad. There's enough blame to go around for both parties. The problem today is that an unbiased look at the party in power and its policies is always Un-American. Oh, yeah, that's right, it's Un-American to question the administration during a war (that is, if it's Republican-generated), but then again, we're always in a state of war now, aren't we? So I guess it'll be Un-American to be American for at least another 6 years, for I have no doubt the current regime will be re-installed. I'd say re-elected, but then that implies they were elected the first time doesn't it? Timba