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 : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (36139)	7/23/2008 4:48:36 PM
From: Carolyn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 224704

Oh, come on! You seriously cannot believe the two are connected? HWL!!!

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (36139)	7/23/2008 6:50:29 PM
From: puborectalis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224704

Richard Nixon 1969: I believe a President should listen not only to those who tell him what he wants to hear, but to those who tell him what he needs to hear. It is most important to get independent judgments from individuals who are expert on the factors to be considered, but who are not directly involved in the operations themselves. This is particularly essential when the lives of American men are involved. Several months ago I read a book by Sir Robert Thompson,1 a British expert who was one of the major architects of the victory over the Communist guerrillas who attempted to take over Malaya in the 1950's. In his book, which was published just as this administration took ofrice, he was very pessimistic about the conduct of the war in Vietnam. He particularly noted the failure to prepare the South Vietnamese to take over the responsibilities for their own defense. 1"No Exit from Vietnam" was published in 1969 by David McKay Company, Inc. (224 pp.).

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (36139)	7/23/2008 8:10:21 PM
From: Brumar89	Respond to of 224704

Obama's presence magically brings down oil prices. Good one.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (36139)	7/23/2008 8:14:38 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224704

Wa Post editorial rips O an new one. Mr. Obama in Iraq Did he really find support for his withdrawal plan? Wednesday, July 23, 2008; Page A14 THE INITIAL MEDIA coverage of Barack Obama's visit to Iraq suggested that the Democratic candidate found agreement with his plan to withdraw all U.S. combat forces on a 16-month timetable. So it seems worthwhile to point out that, by Mr. Obama's own account, neither U.S. commanders nor Iraq's principal political leaders actually support his strategy. Gen. David H. Petraeus, the architect of the dramatic turnaround in U.S. fortunes, "does not want a timetable," Mr. Obama reported with welcome candor during a news conference yesterday. In an interview with ABC, he explained that "there are deep concerns about . . . a timetable that doesn't take into account what [American commanders] anticipate might be some sort of change in conditions." Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who has a history of tailoring his public statements for political purposes, made headlines by saying he would support a withdrawal of American forces by 2010. But an Iraqi government statement made clear that Mr. Maliki's timetable would extend at least seven months beyond Mr. Obama's. More significant, it would be "a timetable which Iraqis set" -- not the Washington-imposed schedule that Mr. Obama has in mind. It would also be conditioned on the readiness of Iraqi forces, the same linkage that Gen. Petraeus seeks. As Mr. Obama put it, Mr. Maliki "wants some flexibility in terms of how that's carried out." Other Iraqi leaders were more directly critical. As Mr. Obama acknowledged, Sunni leaders in Anbar province told him that American troops are essential to maintaining the peace among Iraq's rival sects and said they were worried about a rapid drawdown. Mr. Obama's response is that, as president, he would have to weigh Iraq's needs against those of Afghanistan and the U.S. economy. He says that because Iraq is "a distraction" from more important problems, U.S. resources devoted to it must be curtailed. Yet he also says his aim is to "succeed in leaving Iraq to a sovereign government that can take responsibility for its own future." What if Gen. Petraeus and Iraqi leaders are right that this goal is not consistent with a 16-month timetable? Will Iraq be written off because Mr. Obama does not consider it important enough -- or will the strategy be altered? Arguably, Mr. Obama has given himself the flexibility to adopt either course. Yesterday he denied being "so rigid and stubborn that I ignore anything that happens during the course of the 16 months," though this would be more reassuring if Mr. Obama were not rigidly and stubbornly maintaining his opposition to the successful "surge" of the past 16 months. He also pointed out that he had "deliberately avoided providing a particular number" for the residual force of Americans he says would be left behind. Yet Mr. Obama's account of his strategic vision remains eccentric. He insists that Afghanistan is "the central front" for the United States, along with the border areas of Pakistan. But there are no known al-Qaeda bases in Afghanistan, and any additional U.S. forces sent there would not be able to operate in the Pakistani territories where Osama bin Laden is headquartered. While the United States has an interest in preventing the resurgence of the Afghan Taliban, the country's strategic importance pales beside that of Iraq, which lies at the geopolitical center of the Middle East and contains some of the world's largest oil reserves. If Mr. Obama's antiwar stance has blinded him to those realities, that could prove far more debilitating to him as president than any particular timetable. washingtonpost.com

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (36139)	7/23/2008 8:16:05 PM
From: Brumar89	Respond to of 224704

Bama doesn't know he's not on the Senate Banking Committee Either that or he flat out lied about being on the Committee So which is it, Dumbass or Liar? Obama Doesn't Even Know Which Committees He's On Dude hasn't even been in the Senate for 4 years, it can't be that hard to keep track of his assignments. Now, in terms of knowing my commitments, you don't have to just look at my words, you can look at my deeds. Just this past week, we passed out of the U.S. Senate Banking Committee, which is my committee, a bill to call for divestment from Iran, as a way of ratcheting up the pressure to ensure that they don't obtain a nuclear weapon. Except he's not actually on the Senate's Banking, Housing and Urban Development committee. Apparently when you are the Obamessiah you are an ex-officio member of whatever you want to be. He's also denying he's changed what he said about Jerusalem being the undivided capital of Israel, even though you know, he has. Is this guy a pathological liar or is he just goofing on the press trying to see how far he can push them before they stop covering for him? ace.mu.nu

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (36139)	7/23/2008 8:22:32 PM
From: Ann Corrigan	Respond to of 224704

Recap of Obam-uh's trip so far: 1. he's been backed into a corner on the surge...and he looks foolish. 2. Petraeus told him he disagrees with him. 3. He changed positions again on Israel. 4. Maliki said he doesn't agree with the Obama withdrawal plan. other than that it's been great thus far for the empty O.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (36139)	7/23/2008 10:15:53 PM
From: Ann Corrigan	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 224704

McCain credits Bush's lifting drilling ban for $10 drop in oil price TOM RAUM, Associated Press Writer, July 23 2008 WILKES-BARRE, Pa. (AP) - Republican John McCain on Wednesday credited the recent $10-a-barrel drop in the price of oil to President Bush's lifting of a presidential ban on offshore drilling, an action he has been advocating in his presidential campaign. The cost of oil and gasoline is "on everybody's mind in this room," McCain told a town-hall meeting. He criticized Democratic rival Barack Obama for opposing drilling on the Outer Continental Shelf. Bush recently lifted the executive order banning offshore drilling that his father put in place in 1990. He also asked Congress to lift its own moratorium on oil exploration on the outer continental shelf which includes coastal waters as close as three miles from shore. "The price of oil dropped $10 a barrel," said McCain, who argued that the psychology of lifting the ban has affected world markets. The White House didn't go that far. Presidential spokeswoman Dana Perino said the price drop also could reflect diminished demand. "I don't know if we fully deserve the credit," Perino said. "We don't predict what happens in the market," she said. "We can't really tell. Certainly, taking that action would send a signal that at least the executive branch is serious about moving forward and increasing the supply we have in America." There are 42 gallons in each barrel. A barrel of light, sweet crude fell $1.86 to $126.56 on the New York Mercantile Exchange. That's down from more than $140 a barrel earlier in the summer. McCain also said Obama's Iraq policies amount to "unconditional withdrawal." His criticism of his Democratic rival has heated up as Obama has drawn the lion's share of attention over the past few days for his visit to Afghanistan, Iraq, Israel and other destinations. McCain said Obama's plan to withdraw U.S. troops over a 16-month period "could lead to a resurgence in our enemies, and we would have to come back." Under a McCain presidency, the Arizona senator said, "we will never have to go back. We will have won this conflict." McCain campaigned in this key battleground state. Democrats Al Gore and John Kerry carried the state in 2000 and 2004 while losing nationally to Republican George W. Bush. Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton easily bested Obama in winning the Pennsylvania primary in April. McCain said that the cost of oil and gas was "an energy issue, an environmental issue and a national security issue." McCain also said that, if elected, he'd have a news conference once a week. He also suggested that he would regularly submit himself to questioning before the House speaker and minority leader just as "the British prime minister goes before Parliament and answers some pretty interesting questions." "Why not," asked McCain. "I think it would be fun." He was spending the day campaigning in Pennsylvania, and then heading to Ohio. McCain had planned to go to Louisiana but was forced to cancel the trip due to severe weather. There had been speculation that he would meet with a potential vice presidential pick, Gov. Bobby Jindal, while in Louisiana.