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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (125615)	10/10/2000 4:26:54 AM
From: Joe NYC	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1570499

Ted, OT A couple of weeks ago you were claiming that Gore did not have the intellect to understand new technology. I don't think I did that. I was just responding to Scumbria's claim that Gore was the smartest person in politics when it comes to issues involving technology, which is hard to believe given his poor grades in technology related subjects. Now my question to you: why do you support a man who definitely is not an intellectual giant when you yourself place great store on intelligence? Just curious. Well, my opinion is that neither one is, but one can talk well, while the other one can't. When I came to the US, and my English was poor (still is), the reaction I got from many people was as if I was stupid. I am not very articulate person neither in my mother tongue nor in English, so I can sympathize with Bush. Of course, that is not the reason I am for him. To me, not being articulate is not something that is disqualifying. Neither is the fact that one is not a political junkie. Gore obviously is, Bush is not. Again, IMO, no advantage for Gore. Actually, it wouldn't surprise me if someone held the fact that a candidate is a political junkie against him. Because, to be one, you have to pass on many other aspects of life, aspects that can prepare you as well if not better for being a chief executive. Speaking generally. I look at the general outlook of the candidates, and I am definitely more in tune with Bush than with any of Gore's outlooks, the least favorite being the 2000 edition of Al Gore. Actually, I didn't have such a negative opinion of the 1988 edition of Al Gore, when he was running for president, when he came to New York, and found a sponsor in our mayor Ed Koch. He sounded somewhat reasonable to someone paying only superficial attention (myself). He sounded a lot more reasonable that the 2000 edition (soak the rich, stand up to the big corporations, no controlling legal authority) Al Gore. Anyway, I posted here that I much prefer the vice presidential candidates Cheney and Lieberman compared to the presidential candidates. I always had a good opinion of both of these man, well before they were VP candidates, and their debate just confirmed my previous impressions. you never commented on my catching the trick question/the trick formula (?) in your post re carbon monoxide a few weeks back. I was disappointed. Sorry, I must have been in the "turbo mode" - (anytime I see 100s of unread posts, I go with "next 10", and overlook stuff). I recall accusing you (unjustly) of saying that we are being poisoned by CO2, while it must have been posted by someone else. I remember you getting back to me, so if I didn't reply earlier, I owe you an apology. I don't recall any trick questions though. Do you have the link to your post (the SI search is broken) Joe

To: tejek who wrote (125615)	10/10/2000 12:42:25 PM
From: pgerassi	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1570499

Dear Tejek: And you are doing the same to Bush. Hypocrite! From the debate, Gore's own commercials, interviews, etc., he has been shown to take liberties with history, and facts. He is not the father of the internet (it started as the ARPANET (Advanced Research Projects Agency Network) funded by the DOD (Military Research) well before he contributed anything), the school girl did not have to stand for the entire class (hey it happened to me last year when I went to a late afternoon course at UWM (not very crowded by any sort of standard) and was fixed by moving the class to a bigger room), and various other exagerations too numerous to mention here. He lied to us Midwesterners when, we had our gasoline shortage crunch in May, June of this year and stated then, that the SPR should never be used to bring down high prices. Now, less than 3 months later, a price spike in the Northeast, and still no problems in supply, he promotes the opposite. Now, if he can not keep his convictions for 3 months, why should we trust him ever again? He does not even point to the real problems with heating oil. There is not sufficient refining capacity for heating oil (environmentalists stop us from increasing the capacity of the ones we have) and those in the NE should convert to cleaner and cheaper natural gas (or do like we do in Milwaukee, heat buildings with "waste" steam from coal or natural gas fired power plants (its called cogeneration now (its a very efficient use of facilities))). Any promises made by Gore, have a high likelyhood of being unfulfilled (much higher than Bush). Also, Gore has a real tendancy to go for the quick fix, rather than the good repair really needed. Just the kind of person you do not want to fix long term problems like health care, social security, energy, and defense. Pete

To: tejek who wrote (125615)	10/10/2000 2:27:18 PM
From: f.simons	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1570499

The reason Gore's trustworthiness is important on people's minds is because 8 years, people are tired of being lied to. (from a post of Joe's) Ted- OT -Margaret Carlson had an interesting spin on this this morning on Imus. Her premise is that Gore is not so much lying, (though she admitted he was) as he was fulfilling a need to always look perfect. Somehow, he picked up the idea that faults in a politician are not acceptable. Which, of course, leads to the question of what would this trait do to Gore's decision-making process as President? That to me is a much more interesting question than whether or not Gore has lied about relatively inconsequential details in his life. The lies acquire some importance beyond just being fibs. It is a question that most Democrats, myself included have not really considered. Frank