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

To: Road Walker who wrote (234690)	5/25/2005 8:23:59 PM
From: tejek	Respond to of 1576645

Republican senator urges vote against Bolton Wed May 25, 2005 06:49 PM ET (Page 1 of 2) WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A Republican senator tried to convince his colleagues on Wednesday to reject John Bolton as U.S. ambassador to the United Nations as the Senate headed toward a vote on President Bush's contentious pick. Sen. George Voinovich of Ohio, the one Republican to openly oppose Bolton, urged senators not to vote for him simply out of loyalty to the president. Voinovich said they should consider whether he had shown a record of abusive, erratic behavior that should disqualify him for the sensitive diplomatic job. Other Republicans rose to Bolton's defense, and the White House said it was confident he would be confirmed. "Opponents have argued that Secretary Bolton's personality will prevent him from being effective at the U.N., but his diplomatic successes over the last four years belie that expectation," said Richard Lugar of Indiana, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Republicans aimed for a vote on Thursday on Bolton, currently the top U.S. diplomat for arms control, and expected he would be confirmed largely along party lines. Democrats, joined by Voinovich, contend Bolton is a hard-line conservative ideologue and a bully who tried to pressure intelligence officials into making their findings support his political views. Democrats made a last demand the White House turn over documents they said would shed more light on whether Bolton tried to tamper with intelligence assessments. "It is institutionally inappropriate for us to move forward on this nomination ... without access" to the information, said Joseph Biden of Delaware, the top Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee. Biden and Sen. Christopher Dodd, a Connecticut Democrat, said they did not intend to block the nomination with the procedural hurdle known as a filibuster, but wanted to take a stand on the Senate's right to information on a nominee. Voinovich said in a floor speech he feared Bolton would be an impediment to getting reforms at the United Nations. He expressed concern some U.N. members "will use Mr. Bolton as part of their agenda to further question the integrity and credibility of the United States of America and to reinforce their negative U.S. propaganda." continued............... reuters.com

To: Road Walker who wrote (234690)	5/25/2005 8:51:39 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1576645

I haven't been following the R.E. markets that closely until McMannis started discussing them. Do you know that the median in San Francisco is $750k? And in Buffalo, NY, its $95k? What a spread.

To: Road Walker who wrote (234690)	5/25/2005 11:25:45 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1576645

JF, I'm for bipartisan, you and the Republicans are against bipartisan. What do you think the voters think? It's despicable how the word "bipartisan" has been tossed around like a buzzword for years now. It's just another way politicians are giving lip service to voters' frustrations with political gridlock. Hence the line I love to repeat: The first rule of partisanship is to accuse the other side of partisanship. The Democrats in this case broke precedent by using the filibuster against judicial nominees, then accuse the Republicans of trying to break precedent themselves. At first, I wasn't in favor of the so-called "nuclear option," but as I learned more and more about what was going on, I decided enough was enough. So yeah, I am against "bipartisan," because it's nothing more than a sham. What do voters think? Gee, I thought the voters made it very clear what they thought back in November. Tenchusatsu