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 : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Raymond Duray who wrote (7109)	9/23/2002 9:31:08 AM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 89467

Iraq and the Economy Washington Post Editorial Friday, September 20, 2002 washingtonpost.com The following is an excerpt: " The administration has therefore been right to play down the economic side of the Iraq decision. But it has failed to face up to the economic consequences of its longer-term struggle against terrorism. The burden of a bigger defense budget, an ambitious homeland security agenda and expanded commitments in areas such as intelligence and foreign aid imposes a clear strain on the budget; unlike the one-time cost of fighting an Iraq war, it represents new expenses that stretch out indefinitely. The administration ought to accept that this burden requires rethinking its promised but not yet implemented tax cuts. Instead it pretends that the nation can afford to fight terrorism and cut taxes at the same time; it is even proposing a new wave of cuts on top of the huge package it secured from Congress last year."

To: Raymond Duray who wrote (7109)	9/24/2002 1:01:53 AM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

Gore Calls Bush's Policy a Failure on Several Fronts By DEAN E. MURPHY The New York Times September 24, 2002 SAN FRANCISCO — Former Vice President Al Gore accused the Bush administration today of weakening the war on terrorism by turning the country's attention to Saddam Hussein. He also said the Congressional resolution on Iraq sought by President Bush was too broad and did not do enough to seek international support for a possible military strike. "From the outset, the administration has operated in a manner calculated to please the portion of its base that occupies the far right, at the expense of the solidarity among all of us as Americans and solidarity between our country and our allies," Mr. Gore said. Mr. Gore said that the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11 had yet to be avenged and that Mr. Bush's approach would make it more difficult to punish those who were responsible. He suggested that the administration had become distracted by Iraq because Mr. Hussein was an easier target than Al Qaeda. Mr. Gore seemed careful not to minimize the threat posed by Mr. Hussein, at one point describing him as "an evil man." He pointed out that as a senator he supported the Gulf war resolution in 1991. But he harshly criticized Mr. Bush's willingness to go it alone against Iraq, especially since the war on terrorism was unfinished. "It is impossible to succeed against terrorism unless we have secured the continuing, sustained cooperation of many nations," Mr. Gore said. "And here's one of my central points. Our ability to secure that kind of multilateral cooperation in the war against terrorism can be severely damaged in the way we go about undertaking unilateral action against Iraq." In one of his strongest assessments of Mr. Bush, Mr. Gore said the administration had wasted an opportunity to rally international support after the attacks. He cited new instances of anti-Americanism even among traditional allies of the United States, including in this week's national elections in Germany. "In the immediate aftermath of Sept. 11, more than a year ago, we had an enormous reservoir of good will and sympathy and shared resolve all over the world," Mr. Gore said. "That has been squandered in a year's time and replaced with great anxiety all around the world, not primarily about what the terrorist networks are going to do, but about what we're going to do." Republicans reacted angrily, accusing Mr. Gore of using the Iraqi situation for political advantage. "It seems to be a speech that was more appropriate for a political hack than a presidential candidate, by someone who clearly failed to recognize leadership," said Jim Dyke, a spokesman for the Republican National Committee. "There's clearly a lot of people stepping forward with productive solutions, productive ideas, as far as how to address the problem that face us, and this seems to be someone content to stand on the sidelines and throw rocks." Mr. Gore made the speech to the Commonwealth Club of California on short notice and before a largely partisan crowd of about 450. Some welcomed him to the lectern by humming "Hail to the Chief." Mr. Gore, who took California by a large margin in the 2000 presidential election, responded by telling jokes about the voting problems in the Florida primary this month and remarking about how much he likes California. Mr. Gore's speech came under increasingly scrutiny by Democrats over whether he would run for president again in 2004. Until today, he has kept a low profile over the past two weeks as other potential Democratic presidential contenders have offered their views on Iraq. His appearance here suggested a shift in positioning by Mr. Gore, who has for 10 years portrayed himself as a moderate, particularly when it comes to issues of foreign policy, and repeatedly invoked his 1991 vote on the gulf war resolution as a way of distinguishing himself from the rest of his party. Asked pointedly about his ambitions, Mr. Gore said he would not decide on whether to seek the presidency again until the end of the year. After the speech, he said that his motivation in criticizing Mr. Bush was not related to electoral politics. Rather, he said, he hoped to encourage a greater national debate about the war on terrorism and Mr. Bush's proposed policy of pre-emptive strikes against enemies like Iraq. "The intention is to present what I think is a better course of action for our country, and to advance debate on a real important challenge that we face as a country," Mr. Gore said. Yet with most prominent Democrats lining up behind President Bush on Iraq, Mr. Gore was certain to attract attention by taking a contrary view. Copies of his speech were handed out to reporters by a former California campaign worker and the choice of venue — a friendly crowd in a friendly state — invited speculation about his future. Mr. Gore was asked after the speech whether his remarks were out of step with the Democratic Party. "I don't know and I don't really care, in the sense I am going to do and say what I think is right," he said. "I was accused of being out of step with my party back in 1991 when I supported the Persian Gulf war resolution. A lot of people who criticized that later came to believe that was the right decision." Programming officials with the Commonwealth Club, which is a nonpartisan organization founded in 1903 that has also recently featured speeches by President Bush and Vice President Cheney, said that aides to Mr. Gore expressed an interest in the club because of its long history of presenting important public figures. The Gore aides specifically mentioned an appearance before the group by Franklin D. Roosevelt, a club official said. nytimes.com