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: Nadine Carroll who wrote (219423)	9/11/2007 8:05:33 PM
From: D. Long	Respond to of 793800

I disagree, because it sounds so close to what the netroots are saying Could be, but its hard to tell. The netroots have an equally superficial and reactionary view of the world, so how to tell the difference? <g>

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (219423)	9/11/2007 9:00:11 PM
From: Big Black Swan	Respond to of 793800

You may have hit it. I forgot that they do have that token American to give them guidance. It sounds like something he would write. Funny thing is, I bet this claptrap will actually sway a few Americans. Just a very few, but they don't need many, do they?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (219423)	9/11/2007 9:40:41 PM
From: Rambi	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793800

I agree, Nadine. It is a superficial appeal, based on immediate issues that may appeal to the disaffected and alienated, and sounds as if it were written by someone who was both. As for the MoveOn ad, it is despicable, and I bet it turns off moderates in droves. Petraeus came off as sincere and well-spoken in the hearings (imo), while members of congress displayed their usual grandiose verbosity. You really do want to smack them all when they grandstand like that. My concern is that another honorable man is about to be sacrificed in the political crap that surrounds this war. I read the columns here, and then at Center, and they are so amazingly bipolar. Is there a solution that can work without pushing AMericans past their tolerance point? Is it true that Bush just wants to foist this off on the next admin? I don't believe that dems want us to lose, and I don't believe that the RW wants this to go on interminably. It's been 4 1/2 years. Is it fair to say, yeah, well, hunker down, it's going to take another 5 or 10 in Iraq? And heck, even if necessary, how realistic is it to require that? Talk about a rock and a hard place. (this was not meant to be in any way confrontational; if anything, it is a cri de coeur)