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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: KLP who wrote (67929)	1/23/2003 4:17:26 AM
From: FaultLine	Respond to of 281500

Did you see her comments on Foreign Policy? We've seen it all here haven't we... :o) --fl

To: KLP who wrote (67929)	1/23/2003 10:44:57 AM
From: Win Smith	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

But who is Jane Galt? Is Bush's foreign policy working? Damned if I know. And you don't either. As with the politically fiery, but apparently fairly harmless, destruction of an empty training camp and an occupied aspirin factory, the real effect of what he's doing won't be obvious for quite a while. Until then, give the guy some slack. I'm not saying that we shouldn't be debating the proper foreign policy -- we should, and vigorously. But declaring the Administration's foreign policy a failure before it's had a chance to work has a small chance of making commentators look like prophets, and a big chance of making them look like big fat idiots. Oops, there's that idiot word again, and guess where it's pointed? Offhand, I'd guess Ms Galt is exhibiting the kind of "objectivity" that people who complain about the NYT would approve of. One the one hand, the left is bad, on the other hand, the right is bad, but Clinton really screwed up and people who criticize W are much more likely to look like idiots than those who fall in line. I find the idea that the punditry is insufficiently reverential toward W amusing, what does Jane want? 90% backing? 100%?