Democratic Party slow death?

How are we better now than we were back then?

I think the person in charge has a LOT to do with how the economy works. It takes a rather smart business man to get things going, not some oil chump.

I don't get your point. I AM judging by the content of their character.
I find Condi, Colin and Alberto's character woefully lacking.

And what about all the Democratic criminals, like the Clintons and all of their buddies? How is their character?

I didn't say things are better. In general I find that life get crappier as you get older. My point/opinion is that Clinton does not get credit for the Dot Com boom, and the natural cycle of the US economy. If anything he gets a black mark for signing NAFTA.

I don't get your point. I AM judging by the content of their character.
I find Condi, Colin and Alberto's character woefully lacking.

Most diverse cabinet in American history
The President has appointed more African Americans, women and Hispanics to the Cabinet than any other President in history. He appointed the first female Attorney General, the first female Secretary of State and the first Asian American cabinet secretary ever.

Stocks End a Strong Week Higher

Saturday , March 18, 2006

[-95980]

NEW YORK — Wall Street closed on Friday in an ebullient mood as the Dow Jones industrial average finished a strong week hitting a fresh five-year high.

All the major indexes finished the week with sturdy gains as traders showed optimism about recent economic data on inflation, housing and retail sales.

The Dow climbed 26.41, or 0.23 percent, to 11,279.65, its highest level since reaching 11,301.74 on May 21, 2001.

Broader stock indicators also gained ground. The S&P 500 index rose 1.92, or 0.12 percent, to 1,307.25 — its highest close since it reached 1,309.38 on May 22, 2001 — and the Nasdaq composite index added 6.92, or 0.3 percent, to 2,306.48.

Both the S&P 500 and Nasdaq registered their best weekly gains since January, while the Dow put in its best weekly performance in almost a month.

Click here to visit FOXBusiness.com's Investing page.

A rebound in manufacturing activity and lower oil prices, combined with activity in home building, industrial and interest-rate sensitive stocks, drove the rally that pushed the market. Homebuilding stocks were up nearly 8 percent on the week.

Investors also pounced on shares of industrial companies like Boeing Co. (BA) and United Technologies Corp. (UTX) after a Federal Reserve report signaled strength in the industrial sector. Output from U.S. factories, mines and utilities rose 0.7 percent in February following a decline of 0.3 percent the month before.

The promising economic report overshadowed downbeat earnings news from General Motors Corp., which said its 2005 loss was $2 billion more than originally reported. Insurance firm American International Group Inc. (AIG) also posted a steep drop in profit from settling regulatory charges.

Earlier in the week, the market drew on the Fed's optimism about the momentum the economy is carrying into spring.

Adding to the positive mood was a prediction by The American Bankers Association, which said on Friday that the Fed is likely to wrap up its campaign to boost interest rates by midyear.

The U.S. central bank has raised benchmark rates in 14 straight small steps dating to June 2004 as it sought to bring them to more normal levels from an ultra-low 1 percent put in place amid the sluggish recovery from the 2001 recession.

Hiring gained ground in February with employers adding 243,000 jobs, the most in three months, according to a report released by the Labor Department. The report showed that job gains were fairly broad-based and suggested the jobs climate is gaining momentum.

Heavy equipment maker Caterpillar (CAT) shares rose 1.8 percent, or $1.33, to $76.23 on the New York Stock Exchange, while shares of aerospace and industrial conglomerate United Technologies (UTC) gained 1 percent, or 57 cents, to $58.80.

Caterpillar shares hit a record high of $76.30. Shares of fellow Dow component Boeing Co. (BA)rose 1.5 percent, or $1.12, to $77.85 after hitting a record high of $78.08.

GM (GM) shares slid 4.9 percent, or $1.09, to $21.13 after it reported its 2005 loss was $2 billion deeper than previously reported.

Shares of AIG, the world's largest insurer by market value, fell 0.6 percent, or 42 cents, to $68.82 after the company posted a 72 percent drop in fourth-quarter profit.

Among the day's gainers, shares of Genentech Inc. (DNA) rose 6.7 percent, or $5.55, to $88.14 after the biotech company raised its current year and five-year earnings growth forecasts.

On the Nasdaq, shares of Sirius Satellite Radio Inc. (SIRI) rose 8.4 percent, or 38 cents, to $4.89 after the company said it will be the exclusive provider of the pay-radio service to automaker Volkswagen AG's namesake brand and its premium Audi AG affiliate.

Trading was heavy on the NYSE, with about 2 billion shares changing hands, above last year's daily average of 1.61 billion, while on Nasdaq, about 2.56 billion shares traded, above last year's daily average of 1.80 billion.

Advancing stocks outnumbered declines by a ratio of 9 to 7 on the NYSE and by 8 to 7 on Nasdaq.

http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,188221,00.html

Typical. If you don't like the guy in office every positive accomplishment is immedialtely false and every negative suspicion is immediately true.

-Kiamat Dusk

A few problems:

-The content can possibly be interpreted in more than one way.

-There's no explicit confirmation of it's authenticity.

-This document was photocopied, and then later re-typed? So how do we know it wasn't tampered with, even if it is real?

-It showed up just before the British election, which makes it look like it was intended to influence the results.

-"Unknown" sources are always tougher to believe in general... Most would agree that intelligence gathered from "unknown" sources is considered very unreliable. So I don't feel compelled to consider this any more reliable.

Maybe it is real, and it's showing that the Bush administration intentionally lied, but I still have some doubts. Seems kinda like reading some random news article off the intarweb and buying into it without even a mention of source or reliability. I'd be pretty pissed off if it is real, maybe protesting outside the White House with a "Bush is criminal" sign would be a good idea then...

But factoring in a motive for misleading everyone like this....well, I don't see any convincing motives either.

Clinton's cabinet was cited by you as being good, solely for its diversity.



Examples of non-WASP members of Bush Jr's cabinet were presented.

You replied with your opinions regarding their behaviors (or more accurately your perception of their behaviors), dismissing them for that reason.

That is what I was referring to. On one hand, you talk as if the physical appearance of the Clinton cabinet is what is important, and then shortly thereafter ignore people in the Bush cabinet mentioned due to physical appearance because you don't agree with them.

As for the other part of my post, your citing the Clinton cabinet as being good because of physical characteristics was what prompted my MLK question. Declaring them to be "good" because of physical characteristics is, I believe, judging based on the color of their skin (or what is/isn't between their legs, at that), not the content of their character.

You must be the back up the Republicans sent in to this Forum

So the Rich are getting richer what else is new under the Boy George W. Bush mis-administration

Dude, that has happened since the beginning of time. You can't blame everthing on Bush, use some common sense.

And you must be a Democratic stooge that gets your thoughts straight from the DNC daily fax.

See how easy it is to play to the "excluded middle" falacy? Fun for the whole family!

Your post, sir, is a demonstration of a big part of what's wrong with politics today. It's always either/or, and there's no room for anything in between, the world is only black and white without any shades of gray, and there's no room for moderation, just extremes.

Dude, that has happened since the beginning of time. You can't blame everthing on Bush, use some common sense.

Black and White, No shades of Gray, Extremeist... No sorry you have the wrong person.

The ones who fit this catagory are the Fundamentalist.

Oh yes lets not forget he committed mass voter fraud in 2000 and 2004.

So, that wasn't really you that said that because someone was suspicious about the veracity of the Downing Street Memo (especially given the memo supposedly discussing Bush Jr's ANG service that was later found to be fraudulent) and detailed their reasons for that suspicion, that they "must be" a Republican apologist?

I just had my eyes examined 6 months ago, I shouldn't need to get them checked again so soon...

Would you like a better source than? How about Ambassador Wilson? Our government asked him to go and ascertain whether or not uranium yellowcake was being sold/given to Irag via Niger. He came back and made his report well before the war. In that report, he detailed that Niger was indeed not giving Iraq anything, much less radiative material.

Not good enough? How about the U.N Weapons Inspectors? They reported consistently and often that there were no WMDs in Iraq. Even when allowed full access right before the war, they still had not found anything. Their correct conclusion was that Iraq didn't have any WMDs.

Consider me a wacko "scientist" if you want, but if something can have holes shot through it, just as in the scientific realm, I can't have alot of confidence in it.

You must be the back up the Republicans sent in to this Forum

Well, I'm not really a Republican or total conservative. Actually I'm pretty liberal about alot of things. I'm just trying to be as objective as possible about something that many people let their emotions rule their thinking on. Sorry but I'm not going to take something, that a court wouldn't even admit as evidence, as fact. (The re-typed downing memo.)

But thanks for your feedback.

The memo which discussed Bush's ANG service was found to be re-typed. It was never found to be fraudelent. All the sources for info on the memo have been authenticated.

Nice try though

and yet you have faith in Bush despite holes being shot through his statements on a daily basis.

Nobody --including Bush or Blair have denied that the Downing Memo is true.