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 (340869)	6/26/2007 1:09:00 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 1572942

I'm not so sure that GW is such a good liar as you think he is. He's not as glib as Clinton was. As for false impressions, I don't think I got any of the impressions that you say GW or his advisors or spokespeople where trying to convey. Then again an argument can be made that neither one of us was the type of person that was the target of the statements. The impression I get is more like the literal meaning of the words. A threat that is getting worse, that might not be a major threat soon, but could be a big problem in the long term if not taken care of in the short or medium term. But I can see how paranoid and/or ignorant people could get the impression of a much larger short term threat. The type of people represented by the polls below could be more easily confused, whether or not that was the intention of the administration's statements. ---- "...A 2004 Zogby poll found that half of New Yorkers believed the Bush administration had “foreknowledge of the impending 9/11 attacks and ‘consciously failed’ to act.” (Is this the fault of Amy Goodman?) And such historical misperceptions aren’t without precedent. Consider that in 1985, a mere 10 years after the end of the war, fully 66 percent of American adults couldn’t identify if Washington supported North or South Vietnam..." reason.com