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 : The Obama - Clinton Disaster -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (16913)	8/5/2009 7:48:28 PM
From: puborectalis	1 Recommendation Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 103300

1."AARP to Congress: Don’t Make Medicare More Expensive," AARP, July 30, 2009 aarp.org 2."Debunked: Health Reform Means Rationed Care For Seniors," AARP, August 4, 2009 blog.aarp.org 3."AARP Responds to Health Reform Scare Tactics," AARP, July 24, 2009 aarp.org 4."Obama Vows No Cuts To Medicare Benefits," AARP, July 29, 2009 bulletin.aarp.org obama_fields_tough_questions_on_health_care_reforms_at_aarp_tele_town_hall.html

To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (16913)	8/5/2009 7:52:00 PM
From: puborectalis	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 103300

hotair.com Congress buys 3 private jets for $200 millionposted at 2:55 pm on August 5, 2009 by Ed Morrissey Remember when Congress erupted in outrage over the arrival in Washington DC of the CEOs of the three major American automakers in private jets? The bumbling public relations of the Big Three gave elected officials an opportunity to indulge in populist spleen-venting at rich fat cats and their greed. Public pressure pushed the automakers to dump their private fleets of corporate jets and focus belt-tightening in the executive suites as well as on the manufacturing floor. Who knew that Congress merely wanted to undercut price on their own purchase of private jets? Last year, lawmakers excoriated the CEOs of the Big Three automakers for traveling to Washington, D.C., by private jet to attend a hearing about a possible bailout of their companies. But apparently Congress is not philosophically averse to private air travel: At the end of July, the House approved nearly $200 million for the Air Force to buy three elite Gulfstream jets for ferrying top government officials and Members of Congress. The Air Force had asked for one Gulfstream 550 jet (price tag: about $65 million) as part of an ongoing upgrade of its passenger air service. But the House Appropriations Committee, at its own initiative, added to the 2010 Defense appropriations bill another $132 million for two more airplanes and specified that they be assigned to the D.C.-area units that carry Members of Congress, military brass and top government officials. Normally, that would be considered an earmark. However, since Appropriations merely expanded a line item instead of creating one, it didn’t require the member to identify him/herself. Instead, the jet-setter will remain anonymous — and Congress as a whole can take the blame for passing it. How about it, America? Does this Congress need three more private jets, or even one? Should they not fly commercial like the rest of us? Considering the massive deficits this administration and the Democrats in Congress now run — much worse than anything remotely imagined at GM, Chrysler, or Ford — should they not hold themselves to the standard they dramatically demanded from the CEOs of the automakers last November?

To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (16913)	8/5/2009 7:59:04 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Respond to of 103300

Re: "What???!!! Who mentioned euthanasia?" A COUPLE of posters here mentioned that in the past week. They claimed, (I believe shorty may have been one of them can't remember the others), that the House bill was mandating euthanasia or something. Believe some person phoned-in to the talk radio show of ex Senator Fred Thompson and made that claim. Since then it's been bouncing around I guess.... Re: "Who ever is passing around that email is making up bogus issues and then arguing them... kind of silly..." I agree. But fear tactics often work in politics....