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: Mr. Whist who wrote (203917)	11/19/2001 2:05:55 PM
From: jlallen	Respond to of 769670

I believe he will run. He still has time to make up his mind and is being urged to do so.... JLA

To: Mr. Whist who wrote (203917)	11/20/2001 10:27:03 AM
From: DMaA	Respond to of 769670

Hillary and democrats go to bat for fat cat big business special interests. In favor of Tort Reform on principle? Or to pay back big contributors. Hillary for Tort Reform When we find ourselves in the same trench as New York Senators Hillary Clinton and Charles Schumer pushing back a wave of trial lawyers, one of two things is likely. Either one of us has made a mistake, or there's a juicier story behind the headlines. We're talking in this case about a tort-reform provision in the aviation security bill President Bush signed yesterday that again has the Association of Trial Lawyers of America screaming. But for all their hollering about the GOP's ties to big business, the liability clause never would have made it past Senator Fritz Hollings -- author of the bill and an old tort fox himself -- without some heavy-duty lobbying from the Democratic Senate delegation from New York. To understand Senators Clinton and Schumer's wartime conversion to the cause of tort reform, it helps to know who this provision protects. The list includes Larry Silverstein, who owns the lease to the World Trade Center; the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which owns the site; the City of New York; the airports and certain airplane makers. But there the protections stop, suggesting that this is not a badly needed reform so much as it is an old-fashioned Beltway favor. Mr. Silverstein was a big contributor to Mrs. Clinton's Senate campaign last year, and the papers have reported how Mr. Silverstein has used his yacht to raise money for Mr. Schumer. The headlines reporting the tort deal have obsessed over the so-called incongruity of Mr. Silverstein's pleading for limits on his own liability at the same time he's arguing that the attacks on the Twin Towers be classified as "two occurrences." Such a designation would mean he would collect $7.2 billion instead of the $3.6 billion on the policy. Our own view is that it is absurd to hold a landlord culpable for terrorists driving planes into his buildings. What we want to ask is why other businesses -- say, a McDonald's hauled into court for serving a hot cup of coffee -- shouldn't deserve the same protection Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Schumer delivered to their friends in New York? You can't say they haven't had the chance. As we've already reported in this space, the Democratic leadership has twice made eliminating liability protections the price for passing post-September 11 legislation. Worse still, in both cases -- the victims' compensation fund and federal reinsurance relief -- the liability provisions weren't designed to protect corporate fat cats. They were intended to protect the American taxpayer, who was going into the hole for the payouts. When asked whether Mrs. Clinton's willingness to take on the tort bar was a harbinger of similar things to come, a spokesman suggested probably not; this provision owed itself to "unique circumstances." When we put the same question to a spokesman for Senator Schumer, he too said this was a response to unusual conditions that "required things that might not normally be done." It must be nice for their constituents to have Senators so sensitive to the need to rise above principle. It's good for New York City that Mr. Silverstein will get to put his business back together without having to worry about the trial lawyers ruining it. But if this is so important for New York, isn't it good for the rest of the nation too? interactive.wsj.com

To: Mr. Whist who wrote (203917)	11/28/2001 4:03:18 PM
From: jlallen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

You go girl.....!!!!! Female Afghan General Blasts Hillary Over Monicagate Wednesday, Nov. 28, 2001 2:55 p.m. EST A female general who is considered a hero to Afghanistan's women invoked ex-President Clinton's sex scandals to condemn New York Senator Hillary Clinton on Tuesday, just days after Mrs. Clinton penned a column for Time magazine on women's rights in her country. "She cannot defend her own rights against her husband. How can she defend the rights of my country?" asked Gen. Suhaila Siddiq. Gen. Siddiq is Afghanistan's only woman general, a surgeon, hospital director and heroine to a generation of young women who remained in the country, said the London Times, which first reported her criticism of Mrs. Clinton. In a column posted to the Time.com Web site Saturday, Mrs. Clinton presumed to advise Afghanistan on the liberation of its women, offering an extensive list of recommendations. "A post-Taliban Afghanistan where women's rights are respected is much less likely to harbor terrorists in the future," Clinton observed. "A society that values all its members, including women, is also likely to put a higher premium on life, opportunity and freedom - values that run directly counter to the evil designs of the Osama bin Laden's [sic] of the world," she added. "There is an immoral link between the way women were treated by the oppressive Taliban in Afghanistan and the hateful actions of the al-Qaeda terrorists." The former first lady also argued that the mistreatment of women in Afghanistan was "an early warning signal of the kind of terrorism that culminated in the attacks of September 11." But instead of complaining about the burqa, said Siddiq - as Clinton did in her column - other matters should take precedence. "The first priority should be given to education, primary school facilities, the economy and reconstruction of the country, but the West concentrates on the burqa and whether the policies of the Taliban are better or worse than other regimes," she told the London paper. "Let these things be decided by history." By invoking the specter of Monicagate and other sex scandals that came to characterize the Clinton presidency, Gen. Siddiq threw a monkeywrench into any plans Hillary may have had to make political hay over the plight of Afghan women. And while the New York senator's anything-goes marriage has apparently cost her fans in Afghanistan, there seems no doubt about where Gen. Siddiq ranks with her countrywomen - particularly if those who know her are any indication. At the 400-bed hospital in Kabul, where she now heads a separate women's section, her colleagues speak reverentially of her. When the Times asked female medical students to name the woman they most admired in the world, they replied unanimously, "General Siddiq, General Siddiq." newsmax.com

To: Mr. Whist who wrote (203917)	12/16/2001 11:15:19 AM
From: Tom Clarke	Respond to of 769670

Teamsters for Pataki? Republican political operatives are promoting a Teamsters union endorsement of New York's Republican Gov. George Pataki for re-election. The Teamsters, under James P. Hoffa's leadership, was one of the last AFL-CIO unions to endorse Democrat Al Gore for president in 2000. Hoffa is a lifelong Democrat, but the White House and Republicans are trying to capitalize on the Teamster chief's avowed intention to work with both parties. A footnote: Teamsters representatives returned from the recent AFL-CIO convention in Las Vegas rolling their eyes about the left-wing tilt there. The Rev. Jesse Jackson and Sen. Hillary Clinton were the main outside speakers. suntimes.com