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: LindyBill who wrote (78165)	2/27/2003 10:51:59 AM
From: tekboy	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

something similar... :0) As for Congress, probably the only person who's generally considered a serious voice on foreign policy issues these days is Lugar. There are a couple of other Republican Senators whose opinions are taken seriously on particular areas they know well, and Biden is considered the best of the bunch on the Democratic side of the aisle (although he's more an opinion reflector than an opinion leader). Off the top of my head, it's hard to think of anybody in the House whose substantive views would be generally considered worth hearing if they weren't actually in office (although I know some people who think highly of Curt Weldon on intelligence issues). It's not just the professionals' arrogance, though, as can be seen from the fact that this was not always the case. Sam Nunn, for example, was (and is) considered a major, serious voice on security and defense policy issues, Moynihan was very respected, Lee Hamilton was in the Lugar category, Solarz was respected by many, and there were a number of other folk with special expertise who were considered to put substance over politics (at times). It's just that today's politicians, even more so than their predecessors, seem to be almost invariably a bunch of poll-driven partisan hacks. Most appear to know and care so little about foreign and defense policy that they just don't have the basis for serious opinions on real issues, and the few who do rarely seem willing to stick their necks out beyond what is politically safe that day. I suppose it's unfair to use DeLay as a proxy for the whole bunch of them, since he's such an obviously egregious buffoon. But there's little question in my mind that the discussion here, for example (at least when it's at its best, not the juvenile name-calling stuff), is more intellectually serious than most of what occurs in Congress. When you think of the responsibility those folks have, and the access to staffwork, information, and so forth, that's a really pathetic comment, no? tb@doctorsbeyondborders.com