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

To: JDN who wrote (639840)	10/7/2004 7:01:10 AM
From: Thomas A Watson	Respond to of 769670

PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH's words to make lefty loons squirm. My opponent and I have a very different view on how to grow our economy. Let me start with taxes. I have a record of reducing them; he has a record of raising them. AUDIENCE: Booo! THE PRESIDENT: He voted in the United States Senate to increase taxes 98 times. AUDIENCE: Booo! THE PRESIDENT: That's a lot. (Laughter.) He voted for higher taxes on Social Security benefits. AUDIENCE: Booo! THE PRESIDENT: In 1997, he voted for the formula that helped cause the increase in Medicare premiums. AUDIENCE: Booo! THE PRESIDENT: My opponent was against all of our middle class tax relief. He voted instead to squeeze another $2,000 per year from the average middle class family. Now the Senator is proposing higher taxes on more than 900,000 small business owners. My opponent is one of the few candidates in history to campaign on a pledge to raise taxes. (Laughter.) And that's the kind of promise a politician from Massachusetts usually keeps. (Laughter and applause.) He says the tax increase is only for the rich. You've heard that kind of rhetoric before. The rich hire lawyers and accountants for a reason -- to stick you with the tab. The Senator is not going to tax you because we're going to win in November. (Applause.) The Senator and I have different views on another threat to our economy -- frivolous lawsuits. He's been a part of the Washington crowd that has obstructed legal reform again and again. Meanwhile, all across America unfair lawsuits are hurting small businesses. Lawsuits are driving up health care costs. Lawsuits are threatening OB/GYNs all across our country. Lawsuits are driving good doctors out of practice. (Applause.) We need a President who will stand up to the trial lawyers in Washington, not put one on the ticket. (Applause.) The Senator and I have very different views on health care. I've got a specific plan to help Americans find health care that's available and affordable, lawsuit reform, association health care plans to help our small businesses, health savings accounts, community health centers to help the poor, expanding health care for low-income children, using technology to drive down the cost of health care. He has a different vision. Under his health plan, 8 million Americans would lose the private insurance they get at work, and most would end up on a government program. Under his plan, 8 out of 10 people who get new insurance will get it from the federal government. My opponent's proposal would be the largest expansion of government-run health care ever. And when government pays the bills, government makes the rules. His plan would put bureaucrats in charge of dictating coverage, which could ration care and limit your choice of doctor. Senator Kerry's proposal would put us on the path to "Clinton-care." AUDIENCE: Booo! georgebush.com

To: JDN who wrote (639840)	10/7/2004 5:11:28 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

"Well, if you think it not possible, how do you explain how the Kurds have set up a decent local government. Remember, they started this with the Turks on one side and Saddam on the other, both of which would have liked to destroy them." That's easy, the Kurds have wanted their own nation for decades. They are the largest irredentist movement in the world (the largest ethnic group in the world that doesn't have their own country....) Also, in recent years (since the post-Desert Storm Kurdish slaughter that we allowed to happen) they were protected from Saddam by the 'northern no-fly zone', and from Turkey by diplomatic efforts by NATO, the EU, and the US to get the Turks to back off, (& by the progress of democracy in turkey itself). "Today, I would estimate, if all of Iraq were as peaceful and well run as the Kurd portion there would be no complaints." LOL! (Well, I guess if there were no Shia or Sunni Arabs in Iraq, no Turkomen, etc... and they were all 'Kurds', that it might have been a 'peaceable kingdom' all along. And, like Napoleon said: "If wishes were horses, beggars would ride!")