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 : WHO IS RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT IN 2004 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: American Spirit who wrote (8315)	1/3/2004 3:50:42 PM
From: stockman_scott	Respond to of 10965

Enron whistle-blower endorses Clark chron.com Jan. 2, 2004, 4:09PM Enron whistle-blower endorses Clark Associated Press LITTLE ROCK -- The woman who blew the whistle on Enron Corp.'s accounting problems endorsed Wesley Clark for president today, saying she believes he has the integrity to run the country. In a telephone conference call, Sherron Watkins of Houston said she first saw Clark speak at a conference over the summer and was impressed with his vision and composure. She said she began supporting him during a national "Draft Clark" campaign before he announced as a candidate for the Democratic nomination. "He really floored me with his long-term vision for America and how he handled the question-and-answer session with his answers on the war on Iraq and the war on terrorism," she said. A former Enron vice president, Watkins warned company chairman Kenneth Lay in 2001 that the firm could collapse as a result of extensive false accounting. She resigned after the company filed for bankruptcy and was named one of Time magazine's Persons of the Year for 2002. "My Enron experience has brought home to me just how important the tone at the top is," she said. Watkins said she believes President Bush has misled the public, "blurring the line" between the war in Iraq and efforts against terrorism. She said she supports Clark because "he's got integrity, he's not going to mislead the American people and he has a longterm vision." As a retired Army general, Watkins said, Clark has the credentials to combat terrorism and the diplomatic skills to ease tensions between the U.S. and allies who opposed the war in Iraq. "I think Wes Clark is just the person to help rebuild and restore the damage that has been done by the way we bullied our way into the war," she said. On the campaign trail, Clark has opposed the war in Iraq and criticized Bush for his management of the situation. Because of scandals at corporations like Enron and Worldcom, Clark has said, he would increase efforts to hold corporate America responsible for misconduct. But he said he would do so without writing new rules and regulations. Clark spokesman Matt Bennett said Watkin's name was recognized by a campaign worker reviewing donor lists, and the campaign solicited her endorsement. "Her brave stance on behalf of what's right against the special interests at Enron is what made her a national figure and what makes her such a valuable endorsement for General Clark," he said.

To: American Spirit who wrote (8315)	1/3/2004 7:35:34 PM
From: nz_q	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10965

Does GW Bush have the elections win almost a foregone conclusion.? Quoted from another board, comments by an anonymous poster: >>>>>"GW Bush will win! I. Economy is doing great! Well not really but Joe Sixpack thinks DJ is the economy indicator. The Federal reserve is pumping $$$ in to the system "like there is no tomorrow" ..hmmm maybe there isn't? II. Campaign money is no object. Money buys any election you want. Thanks to 2 wars, high oil prices, and treasury money into the large corp's coffers. The ones who got the windfall have more than enough to support GWB's campaign trail no matter how expensive it may be. III. Media is locked pro GW 99.99%.... see above. Money buys any propaganda AND intimidation you want. Public doesn't know or care as long as it "feels" warm and safe. IV. Switch 100% to electronic elections. Going with electronic voting AND NO VERIFIABLE paper trail will guarantee win. Do look into "certain politicians" who are behind the voting machine manufactures and the problems discovered so far. Add to that the increasing blanket of secrecy on how votes will be counted. Money is no object, "hackers" can easily be "bought". hehehehehe ( good scapegoats too if the scum gets to that point and becomes unraveled) V. If polls drop to any levels of concern, Osama Bin Landing will be "de-iced" and produced for the public to see, a job well done. (preferably closer to elections) VI. I leave the best for last and that is a guarantee to maintain control. If they really want the office it's really extremely easy. -------- carefully read, and combine these two articles------- article 1 U.S. Dissident Says Bush Needs Fear for Reelection Thu October 30, 2003 01:30 AM ET By Anthony Boadle HAVANA (Reuters) - U.S. linguist and political dissident Noam Chomsky said on Wednesday that President Bush will have to "manufacture" another threat to American security to win reelection in 2004 after U.S failure in occupying Iraq. Chomsky, attending a Latin American social sciences conference in Cuba, said that since the Sept. 11 attacks on the United States, the Bush administration had redefined U.S. national security policy to include the use of force abroad, with or without U.N. approval. "It is a frightened country and it is easy to conjure up an imminent threat," Chomsky said at the launching of a Cuban edition of a book of interviews published by the Mexican newspaper La Jornada, when asked how Bush could get reelected. "They have a card that they can play ... terrify the population with some invented threat, and that is not very hard to do," he said. After the "disaster" of the U.S. invasion of Iraq, Bush could turn his sights on Communist-run Cuba, which his administration officials have charged with developing a biological weapons research program, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor of linguistics said. Chomsky said the military occupation of Iraq, to topple a "horrible monster running it but not a threat to anyone," was a failure. "The country had been devastated by sanctions. The invasion ended sanctions. The tyrant is gone and there is no outside support for domestic dissidence," he said. "It takes real talent to fail in this endeavor." Chomsky said it was reasonable to assume the Bush administration would try to "manufacture a short-term improvement in the economy" by incurring in enormous federal government debt and "imposing burdens on future generations." The Bush administration was a continuation of the Ronald Reagan presidency that declared a national emergency over the threat posed by Nicaragua's leftist government in the 1980s, he said. "The same people were able to present Grenada as a threat to survival of the United States the last time they were in office," Chomsky said, in reference to the U.S. invasion of the Caribbean island in 1983 to thwart Cuban influence. Chomsky, a leftist icon who is better known today for his critique of U.S. foreign policy that for his revolutionary theory of syntax and grammar in the 1960s, gave a lecture on the U.S politics of domination on Tuesday night that was attended by Cuban leader Fidel Castro. The author of "Language and mind," "Manufacturing Consent," "Profit Over People" and "9-11" said the Bush administration was out to dominate the world by the use of military force if need be, and Iraq was the first test. Chomsky criticized Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar for backing the United States and Britain in invading Iraq under a false pretext that the Arab country possessed weapons of mass destruction. Chomsky praised Cuba's defiance of U.S. hostility and trade sanctions for four decades. But he also criticized the jailing of 75 Cuban dissidents earlier this year by Castro's government. "Yes, I have criticized them for that," he said in an interview on August 28 with Radio Havana. "I think it was a mistake." © Reuters 2003. All Rights Reserved. article 2 by John O. Edwards NewsMax November 21st, 2003 General Tommy Franks says that if the United States is hit with a weapon of mass destruction that inflicts large casualties, the Constitution will likely be discarded in favor of a military form of government. Franks, who successfully led the U.S. military operation to liberate Iraq, expressed his worries in an extensive interview he gave to the men’s lifestyle magazine Cigar Aficionado. In the magazine’s December edition, the former commander of the military’s Central Command warned that if terrorists succeeded in using a weapon of mass destruction (WMD) against the U.S. or one of our allies, it would likely have catastrophic consequences for our cherished republican form of government. Already, critics of the U.S. Patriot Act, rushed through Congress in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks, have argued that the law aims to curtail civil liberties and sets a dangerous precedent. But Franks’ scenario goes much further. He is the first high-ranking official to openly speculate that the Constitution could be scrapped in favor of a military form of government." <<<<end of quote. Time will tell.