SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Patricia Trinchero who wrote (136538)4/8/2001 5:38:26 PM
From: CYBERKEN  Respond to of 769667
 
It will be interesting to see who is still in power in 2005, Bush or Canada's Cretin. My bet is on Bush, and I think it's an easy call...



To: Patricia Trinchero who wrote (136538)4/8/2001 6:01:43 PM
From: Scumbria  Respond to of 769667
 
Patricia,

I think at this point Bush has lost almost all respect around the world, particularly with our closest allies.

Scumbria



To: Patricia Trinchero who wrote (136538)4/8/2001 6:05:58 PM
From: RON BL  Respond to of 769667
 
Patricia did you read the story in the SJMN today regards the 53 million dollars lost to fraud theft and waste in the education department under the education party president Bill CLinton ? Did you also read last week in the SJMN buried in the middle pages about the great strides made by this famous education president ? Yes while every one was screaming the glories of his education reform the facts are that 2/3 of 4th graders can't read properly.
Well I don't know if Bush will turn out to be incompetent or not but I do know that Bill Clinton was a failure and that anyone who still believes that the education system should still be run by those people who are stealing from children both the funds and their future should rethink their position and ask the following question. I am in favour of the public school system because I actually believe it is the best chance or am I just a stooge spouting a political agenda and don't really give a damn about the children ?

Also when saying that Bill Clinton was a failure it appears that those things that he took charge of were a disaster. The education system, the energy system and his peace initiatives. The one thing that he took credit for that he had little to do with was the achievement of business through great strides in technology. If he had come up with a solid energy plan the economy wouldn't be in the mess it is. In essence he had no vision other than sexual fantasies. He spent most of his time travelling and fund raising and taking credit for things he never did instead of focusing on his job.

As far as Bush who knows only time will tell. To be honest I think the politicians in Washington have their own best interest at heart certainly not the American people.



To: Patricia Trinchero who wrote (136538)4/8/2001 8:32:50 PM
From: Thomas A Watson  Respond to of 769667
 
deat patricia, once again I guess I am the village idiot and as such I make simple observations. You post an article and do not dispute any part of the article and thus one would conclude that you believe all points made in the article.

So from the damn the torpedoes section that I find stupid I would conclude that you agree fully with the Chinese that the US should apologize for being run into. Patricia are you in fact a member or former member of the communist party.

The other thing I find very curious is why if dealing with former ex-pres the first rapist was so easy that there are any Canadian current issues. President Bush has not put in place or changed anything with regards to Canada.

Now based on CHRETIEN's remarks maybe the US should look at beef imports from Canada as the behavior of Mr. CHRETIEN indicates the possibility of some mad cow disease. To me any person who suggests the Chinese have any valid position on apology are definitely infected with a case of hoof in the mouth disease.

And by the way Patricia, if ya want some CO2 and sulfuric acid and square miles of barren wasteland, bring on processing dem tar sands.

Well that's all for now.

tom watson tosiwmee



To: Patricia Trinchero who wrote (136538)4/8/2001 9:10:43 PM
From: Nadine Carroll  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769667
 
That is rough sledding for so early in a term.

Bush is not stupid (anyone who thinks so is kidding himself) but he is appallingly ignorant on policy matters, especially foreign policy. He especially makes a sad contrast to Clinton, who could speak knowledgably off the cuff on nearly any subject.