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.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Broken_Clock who wrote (143690)	8/30/2008 1:58:13 PM
From: Travis_Bickle	Respond to of 306849

I have no problem with beefing up the FBI and police forces. I get more benefit out of that than from military spending.

To: Broken_Clock who wrote (143690)	8/30/2008 2:04:52 PM
From: JBTFD	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

Doesn't it get old parroting talking points?

To: Broken_Clock who wrote (143690)	8/30/2008 2:09:51 PM
From: Smiling Bob	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 306849

Don't disagree with you on what he said Without watching the speech from about 15 minutes to 17 minutes where he uses those words, you miss his point. His meaning of security is little to do with military His definition of security comes from funding the volunteer agencies ie. americorps that assist with all types of domestic needs. He's again talking about funding renewable energy as a means of national security. Talking about peace corp, expanding technology, vets helping vets etc. There's nothing regarding "militia." You're falling for the smear. Please don't. Our country can't afford four more years Here's the link again thesourcedaily.com