Foreign Affairs Discussion Group Message Board

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

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: paul_philp who wrote (67809)	1/22/2003 8:36:26 PM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (1) of 281500

Here is both a New Republic and a National Review story. No surprise but they don't totally agree. Thanks. In the interim, I did a bit of checking and found a great many links, all Bill would consider of dubious ideological lineage, that argue Pickering reduced the sentence for the one guy who got a serious one and remarked that the charged cross burning was only a drunken prank. But the big thing, my little bit of research ran across, is that the issues Pickering raises are large. There's a great deal of negative stuff. The cross burning is only the tip of the iceberg. If we have a discussion about him later on, it will definitely need to be labeled off topic. And it may not even be a good idea to have it. It's going to be intense because the evidence against him is a bit like that against Lott, tracks back many years, but the more recent stuff is much thicker and more objectionable than that against Lott. I have to believe that Bush renominated him with the expectation of a grand rumble, as a way to do the nod and a wink back to the white southern base of the party.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next