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: Mary Cluney who wrote (60587)	8/15/2004 10:48:27 AM
From: Andrew N. Cothran	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793843

Your statement, however internally contradictory it is, is still fairly astute. The internal contradictions: Statement 1: If Karl Rove thought there were (should be was) any merit in this, he would be endorsing this book. Statement 2: I think they are going to stay clear of this book. Statement 3. That (staying clear) is probably a smart them for them (Rove?) to do. Your statements taken together either mean: 1. Rove is not endorsing the book because he does not think there is any merit to it. (or) 2. Rove sees merit to the book but is clever enough of a politician to stay clear of it. (or) 3. Rove, knowing that the book has political legs of its own and does not need him to push it along, wisely decides to remain above the fray. By endorsing the book, Rove would lessen its political impact. By remaining above the fray, Rove and the Republicans can enjoy watching Kerry twist painfully in the wind, hanging from that self-selected noose which he (Kerry) so carefully constructed. As you concluded, Mary: ". . .a smart thing to do." Also politically brilliant.