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 : Moderate Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dale Baker who wrote (5905)	1/19/2004 12:25:48 PM
From: The Philosopher	Respond to of 20773

There's an interesting article in the Jan 19 New Yorker,which I can't post because I don't subscribe to the online site, titled Fortress Bush. Naturally, being in the New Yorker, it is anti-Bush, but it makes, both advertently and inadvertently, some interesting points. One is that Bush sees the media as essentially another special interest group. Which, when you think about it, it is. The press is a business like any other. Its product is controversy -- no controversy, few readers or viewers. The article complains that in the Bush White House everybody is "on message," that reporters don't get as many leaks or complaints as in past administrations. The implication is that White House employees somehow have an obligation not only to disagree with what their boss says or does, but also an obligation to go whining about it to the press. The idea that folks should just go to work, do their job right, and go home is somehow alien to a reporter. It's a bit depressing, though not surprising, that the media would think this way. Media people like to think that there is something special about their business. But in reality, if I had to choose between losing the food industry, the oil industry, or the media industry, for me, at least, the media would be the first to go. I can do without newspapers, magazines, and TV a lot mroe easily than I can do without food or fuel.

To: Dale Baker who wrote (5905)	1/19/2004 12:33:06 PM
From: redfish	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20773

Whoever the dem nominee is, he can't call Bush a liar. Bush is, and will continue to be, too well regarded to do that. Also, he is basically a decent and likable guy (though probably in over his head). The way to attack Bush is to shower him with praise and gratitude for the service he has given to his country during one of the most difficult times in its history --- BUT, He embarked on a costly, unnecessary war Squandered unprecedented good will towards the U.S. Drove the nation deeper and deeper into debt Pushed through tax cuts that unfairly benefitted the rich Allowed Enron to hijack our energy policy Embarked on disastrous threats to our environment Finish up by saying Bush will be remembered as a great president for helping us get through 9/11, but he is not the man to lead our nation forward.