SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: i-node who wrote (201619)9/12/2004 10:10:52 AM
From: combjelly  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1573921
 
"In the day, you couldn't have both."

Why not? What would have prevented it? We know, for example, that proportional space could be done in that time frame, despite all the "experts" who claimed it couldn't. We know that certain typewriters could be sourced with specialized keys, again despite the claims of those "experts", there is an example of it in the logs. Now true, there hasn't been an example yet of proportional space combined with a superscript 'th' show up yet, outside of that memo. But is there any technical reason to believe it couldn't be done as you assert?



To: i-node who wrote (201619)9/12/2004 10:46:07 AM
From: steve harris  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1573921
 
David,
I see Albright is to be on MeetTheDepressed today with Powell.

Any chance she tells us where Osama's frozen corpse is?



To: i-node who wrote (201619)9/12/2004 4:54:28 PM
From: tejek  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1573921
 
<font color=brown> Hmmmmmmmm.........didn't you say that Bush had this one under control?<font color=black>

**********************************************

Posted 9/12/2004 3:30 PM









Bush official: U.S. has been advised about possible North Korea nuclear weapons test

WASHINGTON (AP) — The United States has received indications North Korea might be trying to test a nuclear weapon, a senior Bush administration said Sunday.
The official said there is no evidence that a large mushroom cloud that reportedly billowed up from North Korea was linked to the communist nation's suspected nuclear weapons program.


"We're watching the indicators to see whether this is normal activity or whether something else is under way," the official said on condition of anonymity.

The White House periodically receives reports that North Korea is seeking to test a nuclear weapon, the official said.

President Bush's senior foreign policy advisers said publicly Sunday that they did not think the reported explosion Thursday near North Korea's border with China was related to North Korea's nuclear aspirations.

"We have no indication that it was a nuclear event of any kind," Secretary of State Colin Powell told ABC's This Week. "Exactly what it was, we're not sure." (Related story: Powell: N. Korea explosion wasn't nuclear)

He said the administration was closely watching activities taking place at some sites in North Korea, but that "it is not conclusive that they are moving toward a test."

National security adviser Condoleezza Rice said on CNN's Late Edition that it would not be "smart" for the North Koreans to test because it would further isolate them.

Rice also said the explosion was not likely a test. "We don't think, at this point, it was a nuclear event, but we're looking at it and will get further analysis," she said. "There are all kinds of reports and all kinds of assessments that are going on. Maybe it was a fire — some kind of forest fire."

Asked whether a U.S. military option is on the table concerning North Korea, Rice said, "The president never takes any option off the table, but we believe the way to resolve this is diplomatically."

continued...............

usatoday.com



To: i-node who wrote (201619)9/12/2004 5:06:14 PM
From: tejek  Respond to of 1573921
 
I believe this has been the context of the argument since the outset.


No the argument, some would say furor, has been multi faceted from the outset.............here are some of the key points:

***********************************************

The X Files Of Lt. Bush

By AMANDA RIPLEY



Monday, Sep. 20, 2004

Journalists and politicos have been trying off and on for a decade now to suss out exactly what George W. Bush did in the National Guard more than 30 years ago. The basic facts are not very mysterious: Bush got a coveted homeland gig in the Guard, just as many other well-connected college graduates did, while hundreds of thousands of other young men got drafted and sent to Vietnam. Ever since Bush ran for Texas Governor in 1994, details of the subplot have dribbled out, suggesting that he was a slacker in his later days as a pilot in the Guard and may not have fulfilled his obligations to the military. Bush has prolonged the intrigue by never fully answering questions about his service. His representatives repeat, like a mantra, that Bush was honorably discharged from the service, so why keep asking us about these pesky details?

<snip>

Various search dogs, partisan and not, barked madly up and down the hills of people's memories last week, sometimes scenting truth and other times falling off the cliff entirely. CBS released several damning new memos, which may or may not be authentic (more on that later), that sent forensic experts researching the history of the type font Times New Roman and bloggers dusting off their old IBM typewriters. Welcome to the final stage of a tight race. Now let's pause for a few reality checks.









On the question of whether Bush got preferential treatment as the son of a Texas Congressman and later the U.S. ambassador to the U.N., Ben Barnes, a former speaker of the Texas House, has long been on record saying he did. After years of denying he had done anything special for Bush, he reluctantly said in a 1999 deposition that he had pushed to get Bush into the Guard at the request of a friend of the Bush family. Recently, Barnes, who has become a fund raiser for Kerry, has again spoken out about the matter, acknowledging at a Texas rally and on CBS that he had helped Bush. Bush has always denied that he or his family asked for any favors.

After Bush joined the Guard in Texas in 1968, he received positive evaluations. But records clearly show that his performance dropped off suddenly in 1972. After he transferred to an Alabama unit so he could work on the Senate campaign of a family friend, Bush began missing regular Guard duty. Only one member of Bush's unit has come forward to say he saw Bush reporting for duty in Alabama, but his recollection places Bush in the state before Bush was officially assigned there.

<snip>

In a report last week, the Boston Globe zeroed in on a document showing that before Bush moved to Cambridge, Mass., in 1973 to attend Harvard Business School, he pledged to register with a local unit. In 1999 his spokesman Dan Bartlett told the Washington Post that Bush had indeed done so. Bartlett told TIME last week he had misspoken. Bush never registered locally. But he did not have to, Bartlett now claims, because the military's central registry in Denver knew his whereabouts. It remains unclear, however, what exactly the registration rules were at the time.

The biggest blot on Bush's record may be his failure to take his required annual physical in 1972. As a result, he was suspended from flying — an embarrassment for serious pilots. In years past, the Bush campaign claimed he missed the physical because his personal physician was in Houston. Now the White House says Bush did not need to take the physical, since he did not intend to fly during his stint in Alabama. New egregious claims about Bush's service are made in four memos released by CBS last Wednesday dating from 1972 and 1973. The network has not revealed how it obtained the documents but says they are from the personal files of Lieut. Colonel Jerry Killian, Bush's squadron commander in Texas, now deceased. If authentic, they demonstrate more favoritism toward Bush than previously indicated. In one document, Killian states that he and his superior, Major General Bobby Hodges, were pressured by Walter Staudt, the Texas National Guard commander, to "sugar coat" an evaluation of Bush. Hodges, who initially thought the memos were handwritten and authentic, now says he thinks they are fake. He told TIME last week, "There was no political pressure that I can remember." And Staudt's military records show that he had left the Guard by the time the memo was written, according to the Dallas Morning News. A TIME reporter called and visited Staudt's home but got no response. Killian's son Gary, who served in the Guard alongside his father from 1971 to 1979, says he believes the documents are fake, in part because he remembers that his father admired Bush.

So far, forensic and typewriter experts consulted by TIME and other major media organizations have not reached a consensus on the authenticity of the memos. Some insist it would have been nearly impossible for a 1970s-era typewriter to produce the memos because of the letter spacing in the documents and the use of a raised and compact th symbol. But Bill Glennon, a technology consultant in New York City who worked for IBM repairing typewriters from 1973 to 1985, says those experts "are full of crap. They just don't know." Glennon says there were IBM machines capable of producing the spacing, and a customized key — the likes of which he says were not unusual — could have created the superscript th.

Another memo released by CBS, if real, indicates that when Bush missed his physical, he was disobeying a direct order from Killian to get one. But Hodges, who is now retired, says missing the physical was "no big deal." CBS broadcast a special segment wholeheartedly defending its report two days after it aired.

continued...........

time.com



To: i-node who wrote (201619)9/12/2004 5:28:29 PM
From: tejek  Respond to of 1573921
 
<font color=brown>Thanks, Mr. Bush!<font color=black>

**************************************************

Victorious on Gun Ban, NRA Looks Toward Elections


Sun Sep 12, 2004 10:22 AM ET
(Page 1 of 2)

By Joanne Kenen
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - With its battle to kill the decade-long U.S. ban on assault weapons won, the National Rifle Association is now setting its sights on the Nov. 2 presidential and congressional elections.

The 10-year ban on importing or manufacturing certain military-style assault weapons expires on Monday because Congress never renewed it.


While many decried its expiration and polls showed a majority of Americans supported the ban, few were ready to engage in a major fight with the NRA, the powerful gun lobby whose large financial war chest and committed 4-million membership has made it a political power for years.

"There's an enduring disconnect between public opinion and public policy on the gun issue. The majority of voters support stronger gun laws but for them the gun issue is not a No. 1 or top-tier concern," said Robert Spitzer, a political scientist at the State University of New York Cortland campus who specializes in gun politics.

"But for some of the NRA members, they are single-issue voters, deeply committed to their cause. As a consequence, they exert deep political force," he added.

The NRA, which generally supports Republicans, has not yet formally endorsed President Bush's re-election bid.

But its Web site calls his Democratic opponent, John Kerry, "the most anti-gun presidential nominee in United States history" despite efforts to paint himself as a gun owner and hunter.

NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre said formal endorsements would not come until Congress recessed next month, but he did not hide his preferences for Bush's record on firearms. Although Bush said in 2000 he would back extension of the assault weapons ban, he never pushed for its passage and has embraced other NRA policy priorities.

"It's pretty clear where gun owners that care about their guns are going," LaPierre said in a telephone interview last week. He said Kerry's efforts at portraying himself as a sportsman showed the Democrat recognized his vulnerability.

"That gun in Kerry's hands says more than anything I can say," LaPierre said. "He wouldn't be doing that if he didn't realize it's make-or-break-it for a candidate out in the heartland of the country."

Some analysts say Democrat Al Gore's narrow defeat in several states with a large pro-gun electorate cost him the 2000 presidential election and that the Democrats lost control of Congress in 1994 because of NRA campaigning against them. Continued ...

reuters.com