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: KLP who wrote (250463)	5/18/2008 3:38:33 PM
From: MJ	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793928

"Glad Bush Is Still Around" Current Events by Paul Johnson for Forbes, May 5, 2008 forbes.com This opinion piece by Historian Dr. Paul Johnson is so full of quotable comments that one hesitates to take one morsel out of context-----as it must be viewed as a whole. A little peek into his opinion---------- "Equally, if not more important, is the way in which Mr. Bush--partly by accident but mainly by design--has switched the war's theater of operations to the death-dealers' territory. At the time of Sept. 11 the battlefield was the undefended West, with its great, peaceful cities. The civilian population was exposed to mass murder at the hands of carefully trained and well-equipped fanatics. Now, thanks to----------and more" "Looking back over the last few years, I find it hard to fault Mr. Bush on any major point. He has always been brave. He has never shown the slightest fear of unpopularity, putting the needs of the nation before his political fortunes" This opinion piece requires repeating throughout the USA. mj

To: KLP who wrote (250463)	5/18/2008 10:47:41 PM
From: ManyMoose	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793928

I just viewed the most sickening program on Fox. They had a roomful of people who didn't support Bush; although a minority had voted for him in the last election only one would vote for him again. They played the clip where Bush said something about the false hope of "appeasement." "That doesn't work, does it?" Then they had the group say why they didn't think it worked. Then they played Obama's response and everybody thought it was wonderful. So what did the moderator expect? If he had a balanced audience, he'd have gotten a different response. I do not get it. Bush's comment resonated with me, while Obama's is based on inexperience and slick rhetoric. Later on they started talking about how the people in the audience didn't reject the message so much as the rejected the messenger.

To: KLP who wrote (250463)	5/18/2008 11:55:25 PM
From: Snowshoe	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793928

>>we've certainly had gridlock for the last 4 years.<< No, we've had gridlock since the Democrats captured the House and Senate in the fall 2006 elections. That Republican defeat was the final straw that prompted Rumsfeld's resignation. The ensuing shakeup brought in Gates, Petraeus, the Surge, and apparent stabilization in Iraq. From the standpoint of independents, having Republicans running the whole show was a disaster. By the same token, I think they will be leary of turning the whole ball of wax over the the Democrats in the next election. That will likely work in McCain's favor. Snowshoe@gridlock.com