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: tonto who wrote (662351)	11/24/2004 7:43:55 AM
From: TideGlider	Respond to of 769670

YOU JUST HAVE TO READ THIS AND COMPARE LOL From Dumbest things on Wall Street ;) Looks just like DNC Click URL for pic and PSFT Electoral Vote explanation LOL We're talking, of course, about Oracle's (ORCL:Nasdaq - commentary - research) hostile tender offer to take over rival software company PeopleSoft (PSFT:Nasdaq - commentary - research). Over the weekend, Oracle announced that more than 60% of PeopleSoft shareholders had taken Oracle up on its $24-a-share offer. So how did PeopleSoft respond? Well, it said that the 61% acceptance rate for the tender offer did not, in fact, represent a majority. "Our Board is convinced that a majority of our stockholders agree that your $24 offer is inadequate and does not reflect PeopleSoft's real value," PeopleSoft said in a statement. "This majority is comprised of stockholders who did not tender their shares, as well as stockholders who tendered but told us that they believe PeopleSoft is worth more than $24 per share." Well, it's great that the board is convinced of all that, but we can't help noticing that 61% there. PeopleSoft seems to be saying that a majority vote can be nullified by whining -- an intriguing theory, but one that we can't say bodes well for corporate governance. thestreet.com

To: tonto who wrote (662351)	11/24/2004 9:01:08 AM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

"Do you disagree with the premise that we will have growing revenues" Well, they rose this year (dead cat bounce from a Bear Market rally?) and likely will net out higher again in fiscal '05... but, considering the $500 billion dollar mil. budget, yet unappropriated continuing Iraq costs, yet unapproved (& thus: yet uncounted) tax cuts (remember the expiring nature of the first round of Bush tax cuts which need to be re-approved?), not to mention the not-yet-fixed AMT mess, not-yet-phased-in Medicare drug benefit... and, of course, the approaching next recession (Index of Leading Economic Indicators down five months in a row now).... I'd have to say that --- without DRASTIC spending cuts --- the chances of fullfilling Bush's campaign promise of 'cutting the deficit in half in four years' is somewhere between slim and none... and Slim is packing to leave town. There is next to NO WAY that deux ex-machina-like 'growth' will rescue the federal deficit in the near to mid term... and beginning in '08 a massive wave of Boomer retirees will start swelling the Social Security rolls, doubling the federal line item costs of SS by '15. "or was your post an attempt to comment on the fiscal irresponsibility in Washington?" Exactly. That's it, Tonto.

To: tonto who wrote (662351)	11/24/2004 9:12:19 AM
From: Proud_Infidel	Respond to of 769670

Agree with #1.....I would have to disagree with Halle Berry at #2 though. And the year's least-intriguing celebrity is ... Wednesday, November 24, 2004 Posted: 2:34 AM EST (0734 GMT) LOS ANGELES (Reuters) -- Director Michael Moore, whose anti-President Bush film "Fahrenheit 9/11" touched off a firestorm of controversy, topped an annual list on Monday of Hollywood's least-intriguing celebrities. The outspoken documentarian, who seemed to be everywhere during the 2004 U.S. presidential campaign, urging the defeat of Bush, ranks No. 1 on this year's "Frigid 50" published by online movie magazine FilmThreat.com. The Web site, known for an anti-establishment take on the entertainment industry, said its list names the stars it found to be the "least-inspiring, least-intriguing people in Hollywood." Ranked No. 2 was actress Halle Berry, who followed up her Oscar-winning turn in "Monster's Ball" with less critically lauded roles in such films as "Gothica" and "Catwoman." "The Frigid 50 ice pack have left audiences cold with their overbearing personalities, poor career choices and chronic inability to stop making fools of themselves," the site said.