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: E who wrote (18551)	7/30/2002 7:04:10 PM
From: Ish	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

I like Cheney. He's stayed within the law. Damn smart guy too. Knows his stuff. It would be hard to find a #1 advisor to the President who has his knowledge and insight. That's my opinion and as far as I'm going to go. Argue as you will but I'm done.

To: E who wrote (18551)	7/31/2002 7:37:21 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

"Halliburton Co. said Wednesday that it lost $498 million in the second quarter, weighed down by charges against earnings for asbestos-related claims and a troubled project in Brazil." If any former CEO of a company that is no losing money is to be considered incompetent then I guess we have to fire a lot of former CEOs. As for asbestos related claims that if anything is an excuse for the fact that company is now losing money, not that one is needed. A lot of companies are losing money. The fact that HAL is now losing money might make (or might not) make it a poor investment choice, but it doesn't say a lot about Cheney. A lot of the rest is stuff that happened before Cheney was CEO, or is complexity unsubstantiated, or is legal and arguably not unethical, or is a minor. The accounting method Halliburton switched to is recognized as a legitimate accounting method, it wasn't like Enron or even WCOM's accounting. If the point is that Cheney's job at Halliburton might not have been as successful as it has been presented then maybe the author has a good point, but he seems to be going beyond that, basically calling Cheney and incompetent crook without sufficient evidence to back up that claim. Tim