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 (73816)	9/29/2004 9:41:09 AM
From: Andrew N. Cothran	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 794379

For those interested in Historical Parallels Election of 1864: U.S.History.com Lincoln’s chances for reelection appeared dim for much of 1864. No president had won a second term since Andrew Jackson more than 30 years ago. More importantly, Lincoln was weakened by widespread criticism of his handling of the war. The Union had suffered a long string of disappointments and many faulted the president’s strategy. Further, conservative forces in the North were outraged by the Emancipation Proclamation and feared its impact on the future of society. Much maneuvering occurred in the Republican Party prior to the convention because of Lincoln's apparent vulnerability. Various names were advanced as presidential possibilities: General Benjamin F. Butler was thought to be popular with the War Democrats Vice President Hannibal Hamlin enjoyed strength among the growing ranks of Radical Republicans General U.S. Grant received a newspaper endorsement Treasury Secretary Salmon P. Chase had supporters among the extreme abolitionists and other Radical Republicans. All of these early possible candidates disavowed interest in advance of the convention. However, the strident antislavery forces coalesced around the candidacy of John C. Frémont, a bitter foe of Lincoln. The president had twice dismissed Frémont from military commands and had reversed his order to free the slaves in Missouri in 1861. These antislavery forces held an early convention in Cleveland and nominated Frémont. The regular Republican Party met in Baltimore and used the name National Unity Party in the hope of attracting War Democrats. Lincoln was selected on the first ballot and offered no preference for a running mate. The convention chose Andrew Johnson of Tennessee, a seemingly attractive candidate thanks to his Southerner and War Democrat background. The platform promised to prosecute the war effort until the Confederacy's “unconditional surrender." The Democrats adopted a platform that called for a ceasefire and a negotiated settlement with the South. They gave their nomination to George B. McClellan, who promptly repudiated the platform and simply pledged to conduct the war more skillfully than Lincoln. During the campaign, Frémont relinquished his bid, fearing that he would split the Republican vote and enable the Democrats to win. The turning point came in early September with Sherman’s capture of Atlanta, a victory that lifted spirits throughout the North and revitalized the Lincoln campaign. The Republicans warned the voters, “Don’t change horses in the middle of the stream.” Also, leaving little to chance, federal officials arranged liberal furloughs for Union soldiers—a source of significant support for Lincoln. McClellan managed to capture 45 percent of the popular vote, certainly a respectable showing, but the electoral tally was a landslide for Lincoln. Election of 1864 Candidates Party Electoral Vote Popular Vote Abraham Lincoln (IL) Andrew Johnson (TN) National Union (Republican) 212 2,218,388 George B. McClellan (NY) George Pendleton (OH) Democratic 21 1,812,807 Votes not cast (Confederacy) 80

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (73816)	9/29/2004 10:28:50 AM
From: unclewest	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 794379

As far as reconstruction is concerned, it is still unknown as to when Iraq will have water treatment and sewage plants back to prewar levels. Mary, Do you have a source for that? The info I have been reading in military oriented E-mails is millions more Iraqis than ever before have clean water now. Also would like to point out that the UN is in charge of improving Iraq's water. That is "UN" not US. I understand many H2O and sewage treatment facilities have been and are being built to replace old ineffective, dilapidated systems. US Army and USMC units have been providing safe water to many villages. 4 million Iraqi kids have been immunized in the past two years. School attendance is up 80% nation-wide. 1,500 schools have renovations complete. Another 1,000 are being renovated right now. 7,000 more are scheduled. All is not grim...:o) uw

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (73816)	9/29/2004 1:03:52 PM
From: Neeka	Respond to of 794379

Mary: You don't seem to object to the war per-se, but accepting the fact that there are several "unknowns" and realizing the frustration you feel about the money required to conduct this mission, I don't know how you can say that Bush is doing everything through the back door when all one needs to do is listen and/or google an issue. There is information, as well as dis-information, all over the Internet regarding what is happening in Iraq. Depending on the source, (that is a subject for another post) you can read opinion and get factual information. I understand your lack of faith in GWB, but what information, specifically, is it that you think he is withholding? Regarding water......I found this site to be unbiased and chock full of useful information regarding the rebuilding of water sources in Iraq. waterwebster.com This site also illustrates the historical vulnerabilities, and the demographics specific to sources of water in Iraq. fao.org M

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (73816)	9/29/2004 2:29:35 PM
From: Bridge Player	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 794379

Mary, you say the following: As far as reconstruction is concerned, it is still unknown as to when Iraq will have water treatment and sewage plants back to prewar levels. Perhaps you have a source, or a link that you could provide. Or perhaps that statement comes from the MSM. Here is a letter that I ran across somewhere (perhaps on this very thread a few days ago): This is a letter from Ray Reynolds, a medic in the Iowa Army National Guard, serving in Iraq: As I head off to Baghdad for the final weeks of my stay in Iraq, I wanted to say thanks to all of you who did not believe the media. They have done a very poor job of covering everything that has happened. I am sorry that I have not been able to visit all of you during my two week leave back home. And just so you can rest at night knowing something is happening in Iraq that is noteworthy, I thought I would pass this on to you. This is the list of things that has happened in Iraq recently: (Please share it with your friends and compare it to the version that your paper is producing.) * Over 400,000 kids have up-to-date immunizations. * School attendance is up 80% from levels before the war. * Over 1,500 schools have been renovated and rid of the weapons stored there so education can occur. * The port of Uhm Qasar was renovated so grain can be off-loaded from ships faster. * The country had its first 2 billion barrel export of oil in August. * Over 4.5 million people have clean drinking water for the first time ever in Iraq. * The country now receives 2 times the electrical power it did before the war. * 100% of the hospitals are open and fully staffed, compared to 35% before the war. * Elections are taking place in every major city, and city councils are in place. * Sewer and water lines are installed in every major city. * Over 60,000 police are patrolling the streets. * Over 100,000 Iraqi civil defense police are securing the country. * Over 80,000 Iraqi soldiers are patrolling the streets side by side with US soldiers. * Over 400,000 people have telephones for the first time ever. * Students are taught field sanitation and hand washing techniques to prevent the spread of germs. * An interim constitution has been signed. * Girls are allowed to attend school. * Textbooks that don't mention Saddam are in the schools for the first time in 30 years. Don't believe for one second that these people do not want us there. I have met many, many people from Iraq that want us there, and in a bad way. They say they will never see the freedoms we talk about but they hope their children will. We are doing a good job in Iraq and I challenge anyone, anywhere to dispute me on these facts. So If you happen to run into John Kerry, be sure to give him my email address and send him to Denison, Iowa. This soldier will set him straight. If you are like me and very disgusted with how this period of rebuilding has been portrayed, email this to a friend and let them know there are good things happening. Ray Reynolds, SFC Iowa Army National Guard 234th Signal Battalion Have you been to Iraq? Has John Kerry been to Iraq? Ray Reynolds has. The interim Prime Minister of Iraq has, Mr. Allawi. I know who it is that I believe.