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.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (17636)	7/17/2002 2:33:09 AM
From: Dayuhan	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 21057

it also means Clinton was a poseur, a liar, a fool, or an ignoramus. You can say that more economically: he was a politician. The same can be said of some others we discuss here.

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (17636)	7/17/2002 10:54:08 AM
From: E	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 21057

Every president attempts to take credit for good times. Bush is only guilty of putting in a gigantic tax cut that benefits disproportionately his rich friends and of not being a good enough steward to see the possible consequences of such action in the event of unfavorable economic developments. His perceived attitude toward corporate malfeasance doesn't help any. "The good news is that there are plenty of other ways to rein in corporate malfeasance. The bad news is that, his rhetoric notwithstanding, Bush opposes almost all of them." The New Republic, p 7, July 22. (I won't reprise here the sorry tale of Bush's false assertion that he, during the campaign, stated a caveat on budgetary deficits, ie that they would be allowable only under conditions of war or other such emergencies.)

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (17636)	7/17/2002 11:41:49 AM
From: Original Mad Dog	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

"Are you better off than you were four years ago?" Remember that? Just one of many examples. Now if you want to argue that the President has little to do with the economy, I'll go along with that. That's Steven's position. But it also means Clinton was a poseur, a liar, a fool, or an ignoramus. If using that line makes a President a poseur, liar, fool, or ignoramus, then Ronald Reagan was all of those.....he used the line over and over and over again during his 1980 Presidential campaign. He ended the final debate with a direct question: Reagan's closing remarks In his closing remarks, Ronald Reagan asked a simple yet devastating question that would resonate with voters in 1980 and beyond: "Are you better off now than you were four years ago?" For many voters, the answer was clearly "No." mbcnet.org Clinton took credit for something which all Presidents take credit for when it happens on their watch.