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 : Did Slick Boink Monica? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Zoltan! who wrote (12729)	4/2/1998 4:45:00 PM
From: DMaA	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20981

But you should also be reminded that Reagan Era deficits were TINY TINY TINY in comparison with Franklin Deficit Roosevelt's when measured in relation to the overall budget and national economy. Never mind deficits, look at spending in relation to the national economy. Govm't is now spending a larger percentage of the GDP than it was in Roosevelt's day. AND WE WERE IN THE MIDDLE OF A WORLD WAR THEN!!! Conservatives have made a terrible tactical blunder focusing so much on the deficit as spending gallops higher and higher.

To: Zoltan! who wrote (12729)	4/2/1998 4:48:00 PM
From: Janice Shell	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20981

Like usual, you refused to respond to a genuine quid pro quo payoff: What is absolutely appalling and outrageous is all the money Clinton the Corrupt has received illegally while in office from China and Indonesia in return for nuclear weapons technology and changes in trade and human rights policy. Zlot, poor Zlot, TRY to calm down! (And also try to say "AS usual".) Sales of nuclear weapons technology to Indonesia? Gimme a break. How would they PAY for it? And you seem once again to miss my point: this money does not seem to have found its way into the Clintons' pockets. Ronnie--okay, he was Altzheimered out by then--was more than willing to accept two mill for a speech about a month after he left office. And of course it was perfectly FINE for "Friends of Reagan" to buy him and Nancy a house. Nothing odd in taht, right? And as for "human rights policy"...wasn't taht a Carter thing? Despised as impractical by the Republicans, Reagan included? And I think it IS impractical to try to impose our notion of human rights on other societies. Might be beneficial, yes, but unlikely to work. Are we having any luck with the Taleban? Offer 'em TVs, corrupt 'em.

To: Zoltan! who wrote (12729)	4/2/1998 5:22:00 PM
From: Sam	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20981

Go read David Stockman's book, The Triumph of Politics. Then talk about these things: "We all recognize Reagan would have done better had he had a Republican Congress, thanks for reminding us all. But you should also be reminded that Reagan Era deficits were TINY TINY TINY in comparison with Franklin Deficit Roosevelt's." Reagan's deficits were unnecessary, if he and his crew had been honest about what was going on. And if they hadn't given the military far more than was even requested (as Stockman himself admits). Also--although I say this with trepidation, because I don't really want to get into an argument over it--the Soviet Union by the 80s was a straw man, the "hollow men" that ended with a "whimper". It is absurd to repeat--as so many Republicans have--that it ended because of Reagan's defense buildup. Their model of central planning was incredibly corrupt and inept. Like almost every government that goes down, they did it to themselves.