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: elpolvo who wrote (25911)	8/20/2003 7:22:51 PM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 89467

Regulation-Haters Spreading More Lies www2.observer.com <<...While Kenneth (Kenny Boy) Lay may no longer be in a position to raise money and conceive policy for George W. Bush and Tom DeLay, other influential executives remain eager to fulfill his role. Among them was Anthony J. Alexander of Ohio’s First Energy Corp., the firm whose failing transmission lines near Lake Erie seems to have kicked off the blackout. As a deregulation enthusiast and loyal Republican, Mr. Alexander raised more than $100,000 for the Bush-Cheney campaign in 2000, thus earning distinction as a "Bush Pioneer." All of the hundred or so checks delivered from First Energy’s donors to the G.O.P.’s accounts were marked with an "industry code"—and in due course, the grateful recipients of the company’s largesse appointed Mr. Alexander to the Bush administration’s Energy Transition Team. (That favor must have been particularly gratifying to him, since the departing Clinton administration had sued First Energy for violating the Clean Air Act.) Whether he also showed up as an adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney’s Energy Task Force remains a mystery, since the administration still refuses to disclose any of the task force’s documents. But public records show that First Energy’s executives and political-action committee have given about $2 million to (mainly Republican) politicians since 1999. Freed from lots of dreary old regulations, First Energy has been on an expansion spree, buying up other companies in an attempt to seize control of electricity markets in the Northeast. More basic corporate responsibilities got less attention, and the neglect appears to have nearly caused a serious radiation leak from the company’s Davis-Besse nuclear-power plant in Ohio. For the company that bought up General Public Utilities, the former owner of the notorious Three Mile Island, the failure to properly maintain another nuclear plant is an egregious mistake, to say the least. Financial analysts are as unimpressed with First Energy’s performance as environmentalists and consumers (who got the first taste of a blackout over the July 4 weekend). "Having come less than an inch from potential radiation leakage from Davis-Besse, they’ve now succeeded in blacking out eastern North America, a much more impressive feat," remarked Credit Sights, a bond-analysis firm, in a report quoted by The New York Times. With a corporate record like that, raising electric rates or executive compensation would scarcely seem to be the first item on the agenda—except, of course, in the minds of the company’s management, which has tried to do both. What prevents any such outrage from occurring, for the moment, is that state officials in New Jersey and Ohio must still approve rate increases, which they’re in no mood to do. At this point, an alert citizen might have noticed that the wonders of the deregulated market in energy have yet to become manifest. That alert citizen might also have noticed that deregulation has led to a few rather costly dislocations. Enron’s rise and sudden demise created a catastrophe that radiated outward from Houston to wreak tremendous damage in the energy and financial markets. California’s manipulated energy "crisis" in the winter of 2001 leeched $70 billion from the state, caused severe economic damage, and plunged its politics into their present clownish disarray. And last week that same thoughtful citizen, plunged abruptly into darkness, had time to contemplate the fact that deregulation exacerbates the corporate tendency to neglect unprofitable yet utterly essential infrastructure—including power transmission lines and facilities. If the citizen were of a certain age, he or she might dimly remember how the nation’s economy grew for decades with regulated utilities (and some that were even owned by the public—like the Los Angeles power plants that continued to supply electricity even during the blackouts). The restoration of power meant the return of the mass media, with the voices of politicians and experts insisting that deregulation is and always will be the best policy—no matter what might have happened in California, Houston and everywhere between Detroit and Manhattan. They utter that sizable falsehood with the assurance of a con man who knows his rubes...>>

To: elpolvo who wrote (25911)	8/21/2003 4:41:45 AM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 89467

NPR's Daniel Schorr comments on Wesley Clark... women4clark.com August 10, 2003 LIANE HANSEN, host: Wesley Clark's flirtation with running for president prompted NPR senior news analyst Daniel Schorr to consider the strengths that other former generals have brought to the Oval Office or to public service. DANIEL SCHORR: Wesley Clark, whom I know slightly, shares one quality with General Dwight Eisenhower, one of the most popular presidents of our time, and Colin Powell, who might have been had he chosen to run. It is the ability to jettison military jargon and address civilians in civilian terms. This quality served Clark in good stead in 1996 when he faced mandatory retirement under the Army's Up Or Out policy. The three-star general was completing his term as director of strategic planning for the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the military command had no four-star assignment to offer him. The smooth-talking general managed to enlist the interest of Defense Secretary William Perry and even of President Clinton. And so Clark ended up with the Southern Command and four stars. The Rhodes scholar who was also first in his class at West Point and was wounded in Vietnam has the necessary pedigree for a candidate in a time of security concerns. But for one who has spent most of his presidential life in uniform, he also has an unusual ability to address civilian concerns. On television he argued for affirmative action and against a big tax cut. On CNN's "Crossfire," he spoke out against permitting a long-term deficit. On NBC's "Meet the Press," he spoke out against the abridgement of civil liberties in pursuit of the war against terrorism. Will the former supreme commander of NATO forces run for president? I suspect that this is, for him, a strategic issue; that he's conducting a feasibility study, or call it reconnaissance. Can he, starting late, raise enough money before the primaries to make him look electable? Do people respond to a soldier-intellectual? I imagine he'll try only if he thinks he has a chance. This is Daniel Schorr. (Soundbite of song)

To: elpolvo who wrote (25911)	8/25/2003 1:47:16 PM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 89467

Some folks may appreciate this post... Message 19241904

To: elpolvo who wrote (25911)	8/26/2003 8:20:43 PM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 89467

Here's a little more speculation just to keep things interesting... dailykos.com I could see Clark taking Dean as VP if he ended up with the nomination, and I suspect based on comments made by Dean and Trippi that he is their lead choice for the VP slot. A surprise announcement of a joint ticket between the two would almost certainly be the nail in everyone else's coffin, including Bush. I think they complement each other so well they could easily crush Bush in what could be one of the most one-sided elections ever. Bush would lose much or all of the south. I'd be shocked if he made it to over 30% of the popular vote against Dean/Clark. Optimistic perhaps, but clearly Dean is taking off in a major way, his rhetoric and style resonates in a way rarely seen in politics - I really believe we are just now seeing the beginnings of what his campaign is capable of, and Clark is a very strong candidate. I have concerns about him being weak on domestic issues vs. other candidates, but teamed with Dean this can be alleviated by touting Vermont and using the incredible campaign infrastructure Dean has built up. Generally I would say that as things seem now, Dean/Clark would be a lot stronger than Clark/Dean, but no matter which way you cut it they can definitely kick ass like nothing else. Posted by Jett at August 24, 2003 08:37 PM

To: elpolvo who wrote (25911)	8/27/2003 2:19:09 AM
From: lurqer	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 89467

Not wanting Dean to pull a Mondale on taxes, I think Dean shouldn't say that he's going to roll back the Bush tax cuts. Rather, I think he should say something like: if you make $75,000 or less, you can keep your tax cut. If you make $75,000 to $125,000 you didn't really need a tax cut. If you make $125,000 or more you can afford to pay more, so you can "make up" for the tax cut that Bush gave those making less than $75,000. Now, Rove will have his minions say that's class warfare. The response is who started the war, and who's protecting the Homeland? JMO lurqer