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: Patricia Trinchero who wrote (196783)	10/27/2001 2:05:24 PM
From: bonnuss_in_austin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

'How to Lose a War:' <<snip>> This is an administration that will let its special interests — particularly its high-rolling campaign contributors and its noisiest theocrats of the right — have veto power over public safety, public health and economic prudence in war, it turns out, no less than in peacetime. When anthrax struck, the administration's first impulse was not to secure as much Cipro as speedily as possible to protect Americans, but to protect the right of pharmaceutical companies to profiteer. The White House's faith in tax cuts as a panacea for all national ills has led to such absurdities as this week's House "stimulus" package showering $254 million on Enron, the reeling Houston energy company (now under S.E.C. investigation) that has served as a Bush campaign cash machine. >> See JHP's post on CFZ: Message 16568282 bia

To: Patricia Trinchero who wrote (196783)	10/27/2001 2:05:41 PM
From: PROLIFE	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Good salaries and federal benefits will attract a better caliber individual to those positions..... what a pantsload. who is going to foot the bill for all those high paying security positions? I would opt for a one year assignment from each serviceman to do airport security duty. The underground is starting to grumble about the lack of accomplishment in Afghanistan. Yes your underground grumbles...but you people would grumble at a free BBQ, so who cares, grumble away. Only grumbling I hear so far is at places like Berkley,(duh) and those news agencies that are not getting ringside seats to the war. I remember the same grumbling going on during the bombing phase of the Gulf war. No one has any patience. The Taliban will have infinite patience...we better also if we expect lasting results. Just as in the gulf war, I believe more bombing now, translates to fewer Coalition casualties later.

To: Patricia Trinchero who wrote (196783)	10/27/2001 3:45:35 PM
From: Gordon A. Langston	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

minimum wage employees aren't going to cut it. Something is always problematic about minimum wage jobs. These jobs should be high turnover or part time and if they are not you can expect trouble sometime in the future. Is it more comforting that they are taking care of our kids and preparing our food? Not IMO At least we have an example in Israel of the elements of good security and the quality of employee needed. Hire them as consultants and save a lot of time and effort. Whether these people are federal employees should not be the issue but FAA standards will likely be invoked. Adding a few bucks to the cost of a ticket will be easily tolerated by the public. If they needed a door to protect the CEO of the airline it would be in the next day. Why this has taken months for airlines to implement (if indeed it has been done) and why the public has put up with it is difficult to fathom. Of course the airlines have treated them (and their flying employees) like farm animals so long it is difficult for either party to wake up to reality.