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: microhoogle! who wrote (47575)	10/17/2000 10:15:43 AM
From: ColtonGang	Respond to of 769667

CNN reports.......When it comes to helping families without health insurance in Texas, critics also say Bush has failed to do enough for his state. "We spend $4.7 billion a year on the uninsured in the state of Texas," Bush said in the second presidential debate. But the state comptroller reports three-fourths of that is from charity care provided by doctors and hospitals and paid for by local governments and charitable institutions -- not the state. On the environment, Bush maintains that Texas has seen an 11 percent reduction in industrial emissions and cleaned up more industrial sites "than any other administration in my state's history." But Environmental Protection Agency data shows toxic releases in Texas went up between 1995 -- the first year Bush was in office -- and 1998, the last year for which figures were available. "Mr. Bush likes to point to the fact that Texas is an industrial state and that's why it's so polluted," said Richard Wiles of the lobbying group Environmental Watch. "That's not the case. In fact for the industries we look at, California has far more of these big industrial smog polluters. But California enforces the law. Texas doesn't." Messing with Texas might have a familiar ring to Bush, whose father leveled similar attacks on then-Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton in 1992. How successful Gore and Lieberman will be remains to be seen.

To: microhoogle! who wrote (47575)	10/17/2000 10:25:44 AM
From: Bill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

The Byrd family ought to be ashamed of itself. Politicizing the brutal death of a family member and letting your family be stooges in a political power play is unconscionable.

To: microhoogle! who wrote (47575)	10/17/2000 10:33:17 AM
From: MARK BARGER	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

The fact that the Byrd family has a problem with Bush, stems totally from the fact that Bush doesn't support that hate crimes law that would have been named the Byrd Bill. Typical bleeding heart idiocy. The hate crimes law would have done nothing to help the Byrd family or changed the result of the trial. But for democrats its all about intentions, touchy/feely emotional caring than it is about results. The scum that killed Mr. Byrd deserve what they got, we have laws protecting citizens from hate crimes already. I respect that Mr. Bush stood against this "feel good" crap called hate crimes laws. I tell ya it's tough being a conservative these days. MB

To: microhoogle! who wrote (47575)	10/17/2000 11:42:54 AM
From: Rambi	Respond to of 769667

Murali, First, Jake Tapper is notoriously anti-Bush so this needs to be taken into consideration when reading his articles. There are some conflicts in the story the Byrd family is telling. They claim that Bush never called them while records show that a 2 minute call was made from the Gov. mansion. The governor did make time to see them, they say under pressure, but he DID spend 30 minutes with them. They choose to believe Bush is lying about the call, despite the evidence, but it's obvious that they are so furious with Bush's refusal to take a stand on the hate-crime bill, and so devastated by what they have been through, that their anger has affected everything they feel and say about GW. Could he have handled it better? In retrospect, could anyone not say yes? But I doubt, had this not been an election year, the Democrats would have given a darn about the whole issue. It's all self-serving. The Byrd story is terrible, and I don't think anyone could blame them for finding targets for their anger- it's part of the grief process, but we need to keep issues separate from emotional manipulation. We were taken in by Clinton's facile "I feel your pain" act and ought to be wiser. If you read that entire article, ultimately what the Byrds are saying is that they oppose Bush because he just wasn't "sympathetic" enough. I'm not sure that's much of a reason to vote for Gore, but it seems to be for them. The use of the Byrds by the NAACP and the Democrats is reprehensible.

To: microhoogle! who wrote (47575)	10/17/2000 12:18:13 PM
From: average joe	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Murali, you come from a country where you are born for the sole purpose of being pushed around by somebody else. People here are guaranteed by the constitution freedom to make their own mistakes. The power of the constitution guarantees they can pursue their own happiness and the right not to be pushed around. You come from a country where there is a tribal chief ready to ascribe an answer to all boo boo's that come along. Your village hejtman is there to push you swiftly along a course of life, his course, the one chosen for you. You are circumcised, married and buried by him. You marriage partner is even chosen for you. Happily you have arrived on these shores at the same time as a reefer head by the name of Lil' Al Gore is running for our Chief Hejtman. Don't count on his star to shine brightly. Like science the constitution that so many Americans have died for over the long run is self-correcting.