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 : Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Kerry -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (2469)	2/15/2004 3:58:28 PM
From: American Spirit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 81568

Clinton wasn't running against the "war president" as GW calls himself. If he had been he'd have probaby gotten beaten. In 1992 it was the "economy, stupid" and GW's father had blown it. But Bush Sr. did fine with the Gulf War. Only trouble was, it didn't matter much anymore. In 2004 we still have a huge war going. Therefore, it takes a military and foreign affairs expert with mucho mojo to replace the "war president". And now that Bush has claimed he is the "war president" it's fair game to look at his service record (or lack thereof).

To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (2469)	2/15/2004 4:17:13 PM
From: ChinuSFO	Respond to of 81568

The issue here is you sign up to do something and then try to go around it (which some call AWOL and it may not be the right term). And who says he burnt the flag. We cannot find more than one person who can vouch for Bush and the Alabama ANG 30 years ago but do we have an entire army of folks to testify that Clinton burned the US flag on foreign soil? At least Bush was the grandson and son of a famous family. Clinton was a middle class person and I find it hard to believe that he was being trailed bu a army of witnesses.