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: Ish who wrote (118895)	12/21/2000 6:21:51 PM
From: PartyTime	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 769670

Essentially, I think Republicans will give us an oil change; Democrats a tune-up. I think what's needed, particularly where money, power and influence are concerned is an overhaul. I thought John McCain showed some populism on this with his campaign finance reform issue, but I don't think he went far enough. If anything, he managed to give the issue to Gore who chimed in similarly. I think technology is changing the world evermore and the boundaries between nation states will change foremost among citizens beyond the respective governments. What I seek from politics is an astuteness of technology issues coupled to a vision for the betterment of all people instead of a privileged few. It's never my desire in politics to elect the ones who are best connected or major party loyal. In fact, the entirety of George Bush rests more on connections and party loyalty than on substantive issues or in the hopes of meaningful change. Knowing how PR works, and knowing how issues get spoonfed to the public more for convenience than for basis in fact, I don't fall for the gobble-de-gook spooned out via pundits, ads or otherwise. Bush is all gobble-de-gook, all puff and connection--no substance. His very presence and demeanor reminds me more of a state representative than that of a president. A small-scale example which personifies Bush's connectivity is a small snippet in today's New York Daily News which describe Bush's apointment of his longtime good ole' boy oil buddy to head the Treasury. It described how Bush, then a bachelor, used to bring his dirty laundry over to his friend's house so his friend's wife could do it for him. You know what? I don't think much has changed. Of all the candidates in this election, I thought Nader was most in touch with the issues of people, and not the issues of the well-connected. I also believe Nader could have handled the issues of technology. I think Gore comes in second. Both men, in my view, would have made the better appointments in government and in the courts. Bush was a no-show on all of the issues important to me. Given Bush's connections and his favorite status, this made me very anti-Bush and my writing on this thread is so reflective. Given I'm more anti-Bush than pro-my-two-favored candidates (Nader and Gore), I would have voted anti-Bush and likely would have voted for Gore if I had resided in states like Michigan, Florida, Pennsylvania where it was close, or Texas or one of the more rural states where Bush was gonna landslide. Luckily, I live in Massachusetts so I had the option of a pro-vote rather than an anti-vote. Lots of folks write to me this thread with a chipshot like, "Partytime, you're just angry...get over it, the election's done," etc. No, I'm not angry, and there's nothing I have to get over with. You see, rarely does my candidate ever win an election. I'm used to this. But it doesn't deter my opinion, nor should it. Finally, Ish, there's method behind the madness--LOL!