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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ColtonGang who wrote (44507)	10/10/2000 6:49:00 AM
From: Tom Clarke	Respond to of 769667

Gore contradicts his own military readiness claims by Joseph M. Giardiello for PoliticalUSA.com In an interview with Yahoo! Internet Life magazine, Vice President Al Gore seemed to contradict earlier claims made by himself and running mate Joe Lieberman that the U.S. military is the best equipped fighting force in the world. In the interview, Gore stated that current military technology is “primitive” and “behind the curve.” As an example he cited his own use of hotel phone lines to communicate on national security matters. “It's tough. It's tough on Air Force Two,'' the Vice President said. “Military technology is behind the curve. I got 'em to put commercial in there, but it's still primitive. Everyone's still primitive communicating up in the air.'' “I'm on the National Security Agency and I communicate regularly on national security matters. But how I log on--hey, I dial up from a hotel room too, if that's all there is,'' Mr. Gore said. In the first presidential debate, Gore stated, “First of all, I want to make it clear: Our military is the strongest, best-trained, best- equipped, best-lead fighting force in the world and in the history of the world.” Running mate Joe Lieberman echoed Gore in the vice presidential debate: “I want to assure the American people that the American military is the best-trained, best-equipped, most powerful force in the world, and that Al Gore and I will do whatever it takes to keep them that way.” Gore made these admissions in an interview with Yahoo! Internet Life Editor-in-Chief Barry Golson and reporter David Sheff in the Internet lifestyle magazine's November issue on sale in limited markets October 10 and nationwide October 17. © Political USA.com, 2000 politicalusa.com

To: ColtonGang who wrote (44507)	10/10/2000 7:03:46 AM
From: Tom Clarke	Respond to of 769667

WHY GORE LIES Tuesday,October 10,2000 AS he was defeating Bush in debate, Al Gore continued to undermine his candidacy by fibbing his way out of the presidency. He visited Texas during the fires ... but he didn't. He never criticized Bush's inexperience ... but he did. A school in Miami makes kids have lunch at 9:30 a.m. due to lack of space ... but it doesn't. Another is so overcrowded, a young girl has to stand ... but she needn't. He invented the Internet. He founded the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. His mother-in-law pays more for her medication than does his dog. "Love Story" was based on him and Tipper. He was shot at in Vietnam. His journalism sent politicians to jail. He didn't know the Buddhist Temple event was a fund-raiser. He was in the bathroom when fund-raising was planned at the White House. All alluring stories. All untrue. Why does Al Gore lie? What is the inner compulsion that leads him to risk so much by exaggerating, misrepresenting and embellishing? He gets caught every time, but he keeps on and keeps on and keeps on. At his core, Gore is deeply insecure about his ability, stature and credentials. He feels that he needs to go the extra mile to burnish his image even if he has to make things up. He is just not content with what is. It never seems to be enough. Like many sons of famous fathers, Gore looks in the mirror and sees less that those who look at him see. We see a former congressman and senator. He sees a son who might not have been able to make it on his own. We see a vice president. He sees a defeated presidential candidate rescued from the scrap heap of politics by Bill Clinton. We see a man who battled back from the edge of defeat to win his party's nomination. He sees a front-runner who almost squandered the coronation the president had arranged for him. In 1996, the depth of Gore's insecurity became apparent as he weighed whether to deliver his speech to the Democratic Convention on Wednesday - the night before President Clinton spoke - instead of on Thursday, as vice presidents had traditionally done. The stakes were high. If Gore didn't speak on Wednesday, the podium that night would have gone to liberals like Jesse Jackson and Ted Kennedy whose prime-time speeches could have been the kiss of death for Clinton, who was anxiously projecting a moderate image. Gore didn't want to speak on Wednesday. First he said the ratings were low (they were actually almost as high as Thursday's). Then he said he couldn't give an acceptance speech before the roll call of the states nominated him (we offered to move up their vote to Wednesday). Finally, he admitted the truth. In a barely audible murmur, he wondered: "What if I screw it up?" This man with 24 years of public life was so worried that he would fail at a crucial hour before the entire nation that he was literally willing to let the opportunity pass. It was as if Reggie Jackson were to beg off coming to bat in the bottom of the ninth in the last game of the World Series because he was afraid he would strike out! For a confident, self-assured politician like Clinton, the possibility of failure would never cross his mind. Even when he did fail at the 1988 convention, Clinton never considered relinquishing the spotlight. For Gore to doubt himself at that point was an indication of such insecurity and self-doubt that one could sense how deep these fears ran in his soul. Most of us look back on our past and find reassurance there. If we were able to climb these mountains in years past, we must have something on the ball. But Gore looks back and wonders if he is a fraud. Are these accomplishments really his, or are they winnings inherited from his father and from Clinton? This insecurity ravages him and propels him to a neurotic propensity to exaggerate even when he is sure to be caught. At first, unused to the rigors of the campaign trail and the punctiliousness of the press corps, one could put Gore's fibs to exaggeration and inexperience. But insanity is doing what always failed in the past and expecting a better outcome each time. Why does Gore continue to make things up? It is a failing that could cost him the White House. nypost.com