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 : Sioux Nation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ThirdEye who wrote (10128)	3/14/2005 2:32:03 PM
From: redfish	Respond to of 362827

Well compare that to the Cuba embargo which has been on for over four decades. The only reason it exists is because every four years the presidential candidates have to visit Miami and convince the Cubans that they honestly and sincerely believe that Castro is a son of a bitch. It's not that hard to control our foreign policy, just be sure to have a well-funded PAC. Of course in the case of Israel you have the fact that the nation happens to be situated on JesusLand, which means the Jerry Falwells are going to be in your corner come what may.

To: ThirdEye who wrote (10128)	3/14/2005 2:58:03 PM
From: SiouxPal	Respond to of 362827

Craig Crawford's 1600: Winning the 'Debate' By Craig Crawford, CQ Columnist LOUISVILLE, KY. Imagine a “conversation” where one person does all the talking, except for a few laudatory comments from well-wishers, while those who speak up in disagreement are forcibly removed from sight before anyone can hear what they say. That is what the White House is calling “A Conversation on Strengthening Social Security” — when the president appears in middle America, as he did here on March 10, to promote his ideas for changing the nation’s 70-year-old retirement system. It is more like a conversation with himself. These orchestrated events, before crowds of mostly handpicked supporters, serve the purpose of helping George W. Bush get his message out directly. But I suspect there’s another reason for keeping the naysayers at bay. That could be why the president is so good at sticking to his guns on issues ranging from Iraq to Social Security: He is protected from opposing views. It is much easier to be inflexible when a vast staff of White House handlers and security forces prevent any chance that he will hear alternative ideas. One of the so-called protesters at the Louisville appearance says he just wanted to know if the president would consider a credible alternative to create private savings accounts for future Social Security beneficiaries. Diverting Social Security payments to such accounts goes to the heart of this debate. Some who are following it, such as protester Mike Bailey, want Bush to look at the idea of allowing investment accounts that do not divert those contributions. “How about private accounts outside Social Security,” Bailey shouted as Bush began detailing his plans. We only know what the Louisville man said, or what he was trying to say, because afterwards Bailey explained it to reporters. When Bailey spoke up during the president’s talk, Bush and his audience of supporters made sure that few in the room could hear what he said. Bush talked over Bailey in a quickly improvised reference to Kentucky’s strong economy. The gratuitous mention of their home state prompted a vocal reaction from the audience, eager to help the president muzzle dissent. During the ensuing standing ovation, police quickly hauled Bailey out of the theater. Did Bailey get his point across? After all, his suggestion of setting up private accounts that do not divert Social Security contributions is one of the ideas floating around on Capitol Hill. “He wasn’t listening,” Bailey said. “He’s good at that.” Retired Louisville schoolteacher James McMillen voiced another dissenting — and mostly unheard — view during Bush’s Kentucky appearance. McMillen said he wanted the president to address concerns that his changes to Social Security could scuttle its finances, putting it in more jeopardy. But he, too, was drowned out by the president and his applauding crowd, then whisked away by security forces before being heard. Both men maintain that they did not go to this event planning to interrupt the president. Neither gave the appearance of being professional protesters. Each said they had never done anything like this, but grew frustrated as they realized Bush was not going to invite any tough questions. “He just wasn’t giving the whole story,” Bailey said, “It came into mind while he was talking. I had to say something.” Power of Debate Here is what I don’t get about the president’s one-way approach to so many debates. Wouldn’t he make a stronger case if these “conversations” included a bit of presidential interaction with those who do not accept his word as gospel? Sure, he doesn’t have to entertain shouts from the audience — although I wonder if even that might be quite effective for him — but why not have a couple of local professors, or maybe a retiree activist, on stage to pose some tough questions? I guess it is naive in today’s world of staged political events to expect a president to submit to the type of grilling that British prime ministers endure in those famous exchanges in Parliament called “Question Time.” But Tony Blair, and Margaret Thatcher before him, gained strength with their constituents by deftly handling biting questions from members of the opposing political party. But Bush’s team knows him better than I do. After all, his worst public moment was the first debate of the 2004 presidential campaign when Democrat John Kerry pointedly disagreed with Bush at every turn. The looks of irritation and disgust on Bush’s face gave the impression of a man who cannot stand criticism. Maybe these so-called town halls are devoid of any real debate simply because Bush doesn’t like real debate. Did his famously authoritative mother spark this resistant trait in him? Turning to a woman in the audience with two sons at her side, Bush joked: “Boys, listen to your mother.” Pausing for comedic effect, Bush then went for the laugh line and a telling twist: “I still listen to mine — most of the time.”