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: Tenchusatsu who wrote (447128)	1/13/2009 11:19:12 AM
From: tejek	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573824

CJ, > I am confident that the Obama staffers are competent enough to use a keyboard with a missing keycap, unlike the Bush ones. Where did you read in the GAO report that the Bush staffers couldn't use keyboards with missing keycaps? Oh yeah. Just making s--t up, as usual. AMIRITE? No. Its already been pointed out on the thread that the Bush WH turned to IT techies to take care of the problem. I might add that you should read before you post but that would be rather rude.

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (447128)	1/13/2009 11:48:12 AM
From: jlallen	Respond to of 1573824

Yes..correct....what a dirtbag.

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (447128)	1/13/2009 2:46:10 PM
From: combjelly	3 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573824

"Oh yeah. Just making s--t up, as usual. AMIRITE?" No. You are just exhibiting the same selective attention that i-node and jlallen have been. The White House staffers are the ones who complained that the keyboards needed to be replaced ASAP to support the incoming EOP staff. Now, some of the ones replaced had the keycaps but were allegedly had the letter whited out. If you replace an otherwise functional keyboard because one of the labels isn't visible, it probably means they weren't confident the user would be able to overcome that obstacle... I know, I know, it takes actually reading a document instead of going by what someone else claims. Neos just aren't good with source documentation. Is it because they tend to use big words?