The Castle 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 : The Castle

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: TimF who wrote (1776)	7/11/2003 2:09:13 AM
From: Solon	Read Replies (1) of 7936

I have not followed this issue. I was catching up on some threads and noticed this yakking about Bush. My first impression is that some of the language is sufficiently contrived to indicate to me that lies and cover-up are (possibly) afoot. "Some reports charged that he was absent for a year. However, probably the most comprehensive media review of Bush's military records concluded that while he, 'served irregularly after the spring of 1972 and got an expedited discharge, he did accumulate the days of service required for him for his ultimate honorable discharge.'" For instance, the wording here: He served "irregularly" and his discharge was...ummmm..."fast-tracked"...he did accumulate the days of service sufficient for an honorable discharge. Hmmmm. How many days of "service" are sufficient for an "honorable discharge"? Thirty-nine, sixteen...three?? What is a "day of service"?? I am not taking sides here. Really, I could care less. I am more interested in the dynamics of these matters and of how power is gained and held. And is all morality (practically speaking) a question of networking around power... Truth has a way of rising to the top just like cream. Of course in this day and age it seems healthy to skim off the cream...

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next