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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Michelino who wrote (109738)	4/17/2005 12:35:59 AM
From: TimF	Respond to of 793718

Michelino, I think your post is what I described, highly partisan to the point of giving you a distorted vision, where you come to believe the claims made by the extremes on your side against the other side.. Not nearly as bad as the far left crazies who think that Bush (or Cheney, or some other major Republican and/or conservative) planned 9/11, or the far right crazies who think that it is just above proven that Bill Clinton (or maybe Hillary) had Vince Foster killed, or who think that "black helicopters" from the UN are being used in a plan to take over the US or at least subvert our liberty and consitutional order, but still not closed to being based on any reasonable measured non-hyperbolic weighing of the facts. So in that sense, it is clear that both Reagan and BWB have proven to be useful idiots in the promotion by the rich of the rights of property as the ultimate trump over the rights of the individual. What a silly statement. First of all property rights are important individual rights. Secondly Reagan was not a libertarian and neither is Bush. They both have allowed for any number of infringements against or limits on private property rather than calling for, or quietly pushing policies that would allow for, an almost unrestrained version of property rights. that Bush has pushed this great nation into the disaster of insolvency That comment is hyperbolic. Under Bush we certainly have spent too much money, and the deficits are higher than they should be, but they do not stand out as being unusually high as a percentage of GDP compared to many periods in our history, including relatively recent periods, or compared to the deficits in other countries. They stand out in nominal dollar terms compared to either but our economy is bigger than it has been in the past and it is bigger than that of any other country. Nominal dollars is not a good way to measure deficits. Tim