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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (32644)	3/2/2004 12:07:45 PM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793693

The "Times" has it both ways with Bush. So what else is new? Haitian Divorce George Bush simply can't win. Monday's masthead editorial, "Shattered Democracy in Haiti," carps at Bush for waiting a few days before sending Marines to intervene in Haiti (this from a page that still laments Bush's long "rush to war" in Iraq). The editorial sniffs: "Sending the Marines was the right thing to do, but Mr. Bush should have done it days ago, when there was still a chance for an American-proposed compromise that would have reinforced the framework of constitutional democracy. Mr. Bush's hesitation leaves Washington looking as if it withheld the Marines until Mr. Aristide yielded power, leaving Haitians at the mercy of some of the country's most vicious criminal gangs." The Times concludes sourly: "The Bush administration's mishandling of this crisis guarantees that Haiti will require substantial American help for many more years to come." Predictably, there's no criticism of Clinton administration "mishandling" of Haiti, aside from an amorphous mention that "Washington made matters worse by prematurely winding down its post-1994 efforts to create a professional and politically independent police force…" Then there's a story that same day from reporter Tim Weiner, "Aristide Raised Haiti's Hopes, Then Shattered Them." The editorial and Weiner's story stories share a perverse consistency: Instead of criticizing Bush for being too slow to intervene, as in the editorial, Weiner's report from Port-au-Prince implicitly criticizes Bush for having intervened at all. After quoting liberal Carter administration diplomat Robert White saying "the United States has undermined constitutional government in Haiti," Weiner concludes his article by noting Haitian president Jean-Bertrand Aristide's "tortured relationship with the United States worsened after he and President Bush took office within weeks of each other three years ago. Many administration officials saw him as little more than a leftist leader of a country whose principal exports were refugees in rickety boats and transshipments of Colombian cocaine. The opposition of those officials now puts them in the awkward position of seeming to have pushed a freely elected president from power in America's backyard." For the Times editorial blaming Bush for hesitating to intervene in Haiti, click here.http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/01/opinion/01MON1.html For Tim Weiner's article questioning whether Bush should have intervened at all, click here.http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/01/international/americas/01ARIS.html

To: LindyBill who wrote (32644)	3/2/2004 12:08:56 PM
From: redfish	Respond to of 793693

I'll be watching every minute of next year's Oscar ceremony for the first time in decades, it is going to be a riot. I think they will nominate Ms Morgenstern for best supporting actress, other than that I think they will ignore it.

To: LindyBill who wrote (32644)	3/2/2004 6:31:37 PM
From: michael97123	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793693

From Andrew Sullivan an excerpt from an article by Prager Lost all respect for praeger in one paragraph. This is way too strong even if one disagrees "America is engaged in two wars for the survival of its civilization. The war over same-sex marriage and the war against Islamic totalitarianism are actually two fronts in the same war - a war for the preservation of the unique American creation known as Judeo-Christian civilization. One enemy is religious extremism. The other is secular extremism. One enemy is led from abroad. The other is directed from home. The first war is against the Islamic attempt to crush whoever stands in the way of the spread of violent Islamic theocracies, such as al Qaeda, the Taliban, the Iranian mullahs and Hamas. The other war is against the secular nihilism that manifests itself in much of Western Europe, in parts of America such as San Francisco and in many of our universities... All this explains why the passions are so intense regarding same-sex marriage. Most of the activists in the movement to redefine marriage wish to overthrow the predominance of Judeo-Christian values in American life. Those who oppose same-sex marriage understand that redefining the central human institution marks the beginning of the end of Judeo-Christian civilization." - Dennis Prager,