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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (175228)	9/18/2003 12:27:02 AM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1578927

Secondly, making large cuts in even big programs may not be doable, because behind every program, there is a constituency that will not let Congress do much cutting. And there is also a constituency for not raising taxes. Yes, that's supposed to be the GOP. The GOP has controlled Congress for three years now. And yet, as you have pointed out previously, spending has gone up each of those years while revenues have come down. The GOP typically is against raising taxes but seems to have a penchant for spending more than it earns. You can't have it both ways and you can't say an expanding economy will pick up the slack when it hasn't done so to date. At some point, you will have to accept you can't control your spending habits and raise your income, or go to debtors court. Besides, there has been considerable cutting to make way for the tax cuts and the war. No there hasn't been. There have been increases even excluding the war costs. I have already shown you how non defense items that are not mandatory have been cut to benefit defense and mandatory budget items. That may not be the problem. Cramer is saying we are not growing fast enough to outgrow the deficit. I agree. If spending doesn't grow at all and the current growth rate continues then the deficit goes away in a few years. Right now, the Office of M and B is predicting deficits to 2008 and beyond. ted

To: TimF who wrote (175228)	9/18/2003 12:41:50 AM
From: tejek	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1578927

<font color=brown>They've spent months convincing the American people that there was a link between Saddam and al Qaeda. Now, in the interest of honesty, they are being forced to tell the truth and we wonder why the American public is confused. It would all be funny if it weren't for the fact that these are our leaders playing this ridiculous game!! <font color=black> ********************************************************** Bush Says No of Evidence Saddam, 9/11 Link By TERENCE HUNT, AP WASHINGTON (Sept. 17) - President Bush said Wednesday there was no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved in the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 - disputing an idea held by many Americans. "There's no question that Saddam Hussein had al-Qaida ties," the president said. But he also said, "We have no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with the Sept. 11" attacks. Bush spoke with reporters after speaking with leaders of Congress about energy legislation. The president's comment on Saddam, the deposed Iraqi leader, was in line with a statement Tuesday by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who said he not seen any evidence that Saddam was involved in the attacks. Yet, a new poll found that nearly 70 percent of respondents believed the Iraqi leader probably was personally involved. Rumsfeld said, "I've not seen any indication that would lead me to believe that I could say that." 09/17/03 17:09 EDT Copyright 2003 The Associated Press.