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 : Al Gore vs George Bush: the moderate's perspective -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: long-gone who wrote (99)	8/29/2000 9:02:06 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10042

Are they selling govt postiions? Are you kidding? That's what this whole administration has been about... raising money. And unfortunately, Bush will be forced by the current system to likely engage in similar acts. However, the following pretty much sums it up with regard to the impact of these ambassadorial appointments: "If [Republican nominee George W.] Bush is elected, these people will serve in office only five months, at enormous cost to the taxpayers," Mr. Thiessen said. But then there is the cost. The Foreign Relations Committee estimates, based on State Department figures, that installing a new ambassador costs an average of $34,000 in moving costs. Double that figure since they will now be gone within 5-10 months and new ambassadors installed. Note how they stated that NOT EVEN Ronald Reagan circumvented the Senate confirmation process during the last year of his administration. That's one more difference between Bush and Clinton/Gore.. Only a Clinton, or Clinton-"lite" would seek to impose their influence onto the next presidential administration, making what are only temporary appointments. Were Bush to do that, the papers would be raising unholy hell about his presumptuous arrogance. But we all already know that Clinton is an arrogant, and pathological liar.