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: SeachRE who wrote (283770)	8/5/2002 8:50:30 AM
From: jlallen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

Hey, I've asked you repeatedly to refrain from posting your weird sexual innuendo on this thread. It violates TOU. JLA

To: SeachRE who wrote (283770)	8/5/2002 2:27:03 PM
From: Neeka	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

Tourett's syndrome your problem Screech? Passages from the book "Slander". In May 2001, former Clinton strategist James Carville and Paul Begala released a "Battle Plan for the Democrats" on the op-ed page to the New York Times. Their central piece of advice was for Democrats to start calling president George Bush names. "First," they said, liberals must "call a radical a radical." other proposals included calling Bush dangerous and uncompassionate: "Mr. Bush's agenda is neither compassionate nor conservative; it's radical and it's dangerous and the Democrats should say so." That's it. That's the new plan. It's the same as the old plan. Call Republicans (or conservatives) names. -snip- In a comic spasm of sophistry, the Democrats; Big-Think men wrote: "We don't believe the spin that stopping Mr. Bush's assault on middle-class programs will hurt Democrats with voters." Evidently someone was retailing the yarn about an "assault" on the middle class being hugely popular. But Carville and Begala begged to differ. (Even the editor must have been overwhelmed by the spin on that one.) These must have been the guys who helped President Clinton formulate his thoughtful response to Newt Gingrich's "Contract with America." In his unifying, statesmanlike way, President Clinton referred to it as a murderous hit man's assignment, repeatedly calling it the "Contract on America." Go out right now and ask any liberal what was objectionable about the "Contract with America" and see if you get a more reasoned argument than that. Meanwhile, the left's political Tourett's syndrome has gone completely unremarked upon. All parties to the debate carry on as if it's totally normal for two of the most famous Democratic consultants to be recommending name-calling as politcal stategy. Clinton seemed to be making a good argument against impeachment by perseverating about a "right-wing" conspiracy out to get him.