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 : FREE AMERICA -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: goldworldnet who wrote (3227)	4/12/2006 10:22:52 AM
From: michael97123	Respond to of 14758

There might be some sympathy for bush but i think generally historians will judge him to have been in way over his head. His corporate style is not the issue--its his inablility to be a successful CEO. How do you do that when the architect of a failed military strategy is still out there saying the dumbest things.

To: goldworldnet who wrote (3227)	4/12/2006 10:27:18 AM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14758

That is true to some extent. But when I say it is not sympathetic, I mean it often fails to take in to account special circumstances of the time- the further you get from decisions. In other words, history isn't very nice about your justifications for a failed policy, or a fiasco, or simply a bad idea, no matter how noble you, or others, might have thought your motives to be at the time. So the emotional material which might "justify" something at one time, tends to drop away as the years go by. I think we've seen that with the internment of the Japanese, which looked like a much better idea at the time, when the country was under the emotional duress of the events of WWII, than it looks today. That is what I mean when I say it is not sympathetic.