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: greenspirit who wrote (273204)	7/11/2002 1:19:56 AM
From: asenna1	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

"Like his father before him, the president resents being challenged — on his judgment or on his trustworthiness. He just wants the country to take it on faith that he and Dick Cheney, who got filthy rich at Halliburton, and Army Secretary Thomas White, who got filthy rich at Enron, are "good actors," as he puts it. Poppy, at some level, always knew and subtly acknowledged that his Texas up-from-bootstraps story line was a pose. He never gave up the summers in Kennebunkport, the preppy threads, the patrician posture, the upward tilt of his chin. Junior, with his pseudo-James-Dean-in-"Giant" lectern slouch, believes he's the real thing, coated in Midland dust. He sees himself as self-made and anti-elitist. But given his slacker start, he ended up relying even more on family connections for business and political success than his father did. He bought a dusty ranch in Crawford to show he's not a New England preppy. But he got the money for the 1,600-acre spread by having the famous name of a New England preppy. He talks the populist talk, while walking the elitist walk." nytimes.com No wonder you think INSP is a STRONG BUY.

To: greenspirit who wrote (273204)	7/11/2002 9:31:09 PM
From: Steve Dietrich	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 769670

As i've pointed out several times, Mineta didn't announce the administration's final decision on guns in the cockpit until very recently, about two months ago. So when you say, "what you spin into "caving" was at the time prioritizing his principles," doesn't ring true to me at all. The public supports guns in the cockpit. So your assertion that media criticism would somehow divide the public on this issue also seems pretty far-fetched. So it seems to me you've made up a very unlikely scenario (pure speculation with no actual facts to back it up) to rationalize coming out strongly against congressmen who voted against the bill while staying soft on the President who also opposes guns in the cockpit. I tend to agree with you on the federalizing baggage handlers situation. That was a long time ago, and it was important to show the public that concrete steps were being taken to improve airport security. That was a smart and honorable compromise. But trying to use that dodge for campaign finance is even less credible than for our main topic. How can a man who takes an oath to uphold the Constitution sign a bill he personally believes to be unconstitutional and still retain your respect? Will he have his Attorney General defend the bill in court, or will he help the challenges? I thought that was just the kind treasonous political hypocrisy you despise? Perhaps you grade on a curve, depending on party of course. Steve