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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jttmab who wrote (175053)	11/15/2005 11:27:31 PM
From: bentway	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

"Is Bush stupid enough to veto a resolution that prohibits torture? I don't think he will because he doesn't do direct confrontation, but if he does he's going to take a political hit for it, domestically and internationally." Not to mention in history! His FIRST veto enables torture?

To: jttmab who wrote (175053)	11/16/2005 8:37:50 AM
From: bearshark	Respond to of 281500

>>>I think it even originated with the Democrat side of the aisle and at the time I thought it was a stupid idea.<<< The Department of Homeland Security legislation started in the Senate. However, there was an earlier hearing in the House that no one paid attention to. Mr. Lieberman might have been a sponsor in the Senate. The legislation may have been considered in an orderly process but Mr. Bush began to push it after it had gained some momentum. I think there is a speech by Mr. Bush in Cincinnati at that time saying Congress was not moving fast enough. So, we have less than a thoughtful public law. That's politics. >>>And the Dems aren't backing down into defense mode like they usually do<<< An important rule in Washington is pile on after someone gets the guy down. Another important rule is, if the guy gets up, run, hide, and cower. Once Mr. Bush declares the Iraqis an independent, free, victorious people; and withdraws some troops; the every-day Democrats will be in hiding. Of course, if they can keep Mr. Bush down in the polls and keep kicking him, they have a fighting chance. >>>But hanging on to that torture exemption and the alleged secret detention facilities isn't going to help.<<< I'd be more concerned with the bad press from the Medicare drug program. Its confusing. If you remember, it was another piece of political legislation. >>>Two months to the SOU and counting. At the current rate, that's 150 dead US forces and 2250 dead Iraqis.<<< The bombshell news in the state of the union address has to be carefully set up. First you validate (or reconfigure) the reasons for the Iraq invasion and watch the poll results, then you praise the brave Iraqi victors after the December election, and then the state of the union with a measured withdrawal of troops and a declaration of Iraqi victory. It isn't going to be easy but it is the only hope. By the way, the new Federal Reserve chairman and his Board will begin reducing rates in time for the November 2006 elections. You like to do research. Here is something for you. 1. After September 2001 and its effects on the economy, what was the extent of the tax incentive that was implemented. 2. Six to 12 months prior to the 2004 presidential election, what was the extent of the tax incentive that was implemented. Based on your analysis, why was there any difference?