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: Nadine Carroll who wrote (37370)	4/1/2004 3:28:50 PM
From: LindyBill	Respond to of 793559

The Pals will still have to kick back to keep their jobs, but it is a step in the right direction. Good comment in the "Jane Galt blog" today. ......I'm afraid, as a libertarianish commentator, I don't see all that much difference between them. I mean, really, in this election, what will I be voting about? Gay marriage? I don't think it's a good idea to handle it at the federal level (see Roe, Wade v.)--plus, neither candidate supports it. The budget deficit? While I think there is some marginal effect on interest rates of the budget deficit, ultimately I think that any such effect will be dwarfed by the long term problems of old-age entitlements, which neither party seems prone to touch. This puts me rather in the Milton Friedman camp: what we should worry about is not how spending is financed, but how high is the level of spending. And on that metric, the choice between Republicans and Democrats seems to be a case of "frying pan, meet fire". In general, on any major foreign policy metric, the differences between the Republicans and the Democrats these days seem to be pretty trivial. I don't really care whether or not George Bush's marginal income tax changes are repealed or not. (I am in favour of the dividend changes and the estate tax changes, but for all I care, the Democrats can recoup all that lost income by raising the top rate even higher) . Nor am I either horrified, or elated, by John Kerry's tax proposals so far. Overall, my reaction to all the policy proposals currently on the table is . . . er . . . akhfialsfahjfhajfhajhfuq93rujhiekhfa Sorry, I dozed off and my face hit the keyboard. There are two areas where I think the differences between the two aren't trivial: foreign policy, and judicial philosophy. On the former, however, while I think the differences are wide-ish, I'm not exactly enthralled with either party. I'm mad at George Bush because I don't think he's sufficiently committed to rebuilding Iraq, which is the same reason I'm mad at John Kerry. I don't give a tinker's damn whether we withdraw unilaterally or multilaterally. On judges, I think I lean Republican. The civil-rights inspired fiat-fest should be reined in, quickly. On the other hand, some Republican judges might be rather more inclined to reinforce social legislation I despise. So maybe I don't like the Republicans after all. Where does that leave me? Ultimately, I'll try to decide which candidate I have a stronger preference for. Probably, those wishing me to throw the devil I know out in favour of the devil I don't will have to persuade me that there's a reasonable chance that the new devil will actually do a little better on something I care about. I imagine I will eventually develop a preference, but whatever it is, it's probably going to be awfully weak, because hard though it is to imagine from the rantings emerging from both sides of the blogosphere, political candidates right now just aren't that far apart. Whichever one is elected, we're going to get a moderately social democracy with a moderately multilateralist foriegn policy, with moderately increasing levels of spending and regulation of high-profile industries, and roughly level taxation. From a libertarian perspective, worrying excessively about whether an elephant or a donkey overseas it all is rearranging the deck chairs on the titanic. And from the perspective of someone who thinks the government should be radically altering the economic structure of the economy in the other direction -- towards central control in pursuit of various values -- I imagine it looks very much the same. Do I believe that Ralph Nader thinks, as he claims to, that there is literally no difference between George Bush and Al Gore? No. But I can well imagine that he thinks there are no important differences between them -- in the same way that if you are diagnosed with cancer, and given a choice between two treatments that both offer you six months to live, you could be forgiven for not focusing much on the details. But back to liberal radio. The morning show isn't very good. A lot of dead air, in between three liberal radio hosts congratulating each other on how clever they are. This would be all right, if they would break the monotony by occasionally saying something clever.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (37370)	4/1/2004 3:33:43 PM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793559

Larry Elder's column will resonate with you, Nadine. Senator Kerry -- the likability gap Larry Elder April 1, 2004 If Kerry goes down in the fall, trace the blame to . . . Butchy Cataldo. Kerry's critics point to his shifting stands on NAFTA, the war in Iraq, the No Child Left Behind Act and the Patriot Act. Kerry detractors expect the public to catch on when Kerry -- a fiscal liberal -- attacks Bush for "fiscal irresponsibility." But, actually Kerry has a deeper problem -- his lack of likability and the Butchy Cataldo Factor. Butchy Cataldo? Well, Sen. Kerry doesn't know, either. Precisely the problem, according to a window-to-the-soul story in the New Republic. The people who know Kerry best consider Kerry aloof, imperious and condescending. Even worse, Kerry can't seem to retain their names. At a 1996 Massachusetts political affair, a Democratic Massachusetts State legislator said to his friends, "Watch this." He walked up to Kerry and said, "Hi, Senator -- Representative Butchy Cataldo." At this, Kerry smiled, slapped his back and exclaimed, "Butchy, so good to see you again!" One problem -- the guy, the state rep -- was not Butchy Cataldo. In fact, Butchy Cataldo ran and lost to this Kerry-greeting legislator whose name is Bill Reinstein, a man bearing no resemblance to the tall, dark-haired Cataldo. Call this a likability gap -- a problem for Kerry. Presidential candidate George W. Bush, in 2000, unaware of an open mike looming nearby, whispered to his running mate, Dick Cheney, and said, "There's Adam Clymer, a major league a--hole from the New York Times." Liberal columnist Maureen Dowd took Bush to task for his profanity, reminding Bush that he now, in fact, plays in the "major leagues." But Sen. Kerry, in an interview with Rolling Stone magazine -- not during a perceived, private, off-the-record conversation -- said that he voted for the Iraq war resolution without realizing that Bush would "'F' it up." Only Sen. Kerry didn't really say, "F." Major leagues, Senator. Likability? At a campaign stop in Chicago before an AFL-CIO leadership group, a supporter urged Kerry to fight hard. Kerry, unaware that his microphone could pick up his conversation, said this about the Bush administration: "We're going to keep pounding. These guys are the most crooked, you know, lying group I've ever seen. It's scary." The Kerry campaign insisted that the senator referred only to his "Republican critics," not the Bush administration or the president himself. (Believe that one when Osama bin Laden converts to Judaism.) Republicans equal: crooks-liars-warmongers-environmental-rapists and protectors-of-friends-in-high-places. Likability? On the eve of the first anniversary of the war in Iraq with the Democratic nomination cinched, Kerry jetted to Idaho to go skiing. As Kerry snowboarded down a hill, a Secret Service agent inadvertently found himself in the senator's path. Kerry took a header. When reporters later asked Kerry about his fall, he snapped, "I don't fall down." Kerry blamed this tumble on his "son-of-a-b-tch" Secret Service agent. Son-of-a-b-tch Secret Service agent? The agent complained about Kerry's treatment and remark. (Maybe the agent feels miffed since his job description requires him to take a bullet, if necessary, for Sen. Kerry. A little gratitude might be appreciated.) A spokesperson for the Secret Service said, "Obviously, the complications and burden of being monitored 24 hours a day is not just a simple inconvenience. But Sen. Kerry should understand agents are working for his safety and well-being." (According to the Drudge Report, reporters observed Kerry falling at least six times.) Likability? Kerry faults Bush's handling of the war in Iraq, accusing the president of "unilateralism" based on "arrogance." For, as president and commander-in-chief, Kerry expects to be able to bring to the table all parties interested in forging multilateral approaches to worldwide issues. In other words, Kerry expects to use his diplomatic flair and non-arrogant personality to convince the French, Germans and Russians -- all of whom did business with Saddam Hussein and lost money and influence after his fall. Does Kerry expect the governments of the Middle East to come to the table and agree on encouraging the spread of democracy while it threatens to destroy the leaderships' power? Presumably, Kerry expects to use his warm, persuasive personality to cobble together a coalition that the war-mongering, arrogant President Bush could only dream about. Likability? Kerry reminds me of a story I once read about the San Francisco Giants' slugger Barry Bonds. Mired in a batting slump, Bonds sat in the locker room and complained about his uncharacteristic struggle to get his offense going. I can't put my finger on the problem, said Barry aloud. I'm struggling. Can't buy a hit. Bonds then looked up and noticed a chronically poor-hitting teammate nearby. Bonds turned to him and said something like -- you must feel like this all the time. So, how could the often tone-deaf Kerry work on his likability? He could drop the approach -- sincere or contrived -- that Bush equals Satan. Or maybe he should ask Butchy Cataldo. ©2004 Creators Syndicate, Inc.