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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JohnM who wrote (116491)	7/25/2009 8:20:12 AM
From: Bearcatbob	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542201

"I gather, then, you blame the unions for the demise of the US auto industry. It seems to me there are two other culprits: the US notion that healthcare costs are work centered; and the ineptitude of auto executives.' Good morning. The demise of the auto industry was a joint failure of national policy, unions and corporate management. Bankruptcy is the natural cure for the excesses of each. Pension plans no matter how outrageous properly funded would not bankrupt a company. To think national health care is the solution to our industrial problems is surely not your complete thought on the issue. Aside from cost - Cap and Trade assumes technology that does not exist. SO2 was regulated using a Cap and Trade system and worked because the technology does not exist. John - you are rational in your arguments and I find you a worthy debater. Ultimately we live in worlds of completely different backgrounds that have resulted in decision making data bases that are different. Only the national experience will show which approach is right. I only ask that policies are honestly priced and honestly paid for. Their success or failure will lead to their final structure. Not pricing or paying for policy - either R or D - will bankrupt the country. I believe we are on a course to a major really bad economic event. Obama has simply increased the speed at which we reach that event. The course was charted long before Obama.

To: JohnM who wrote (116491)	7/25/2009 9:01:43 AM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542201

This is pretty interesting news this morning: Report: Bush mulled sending troops into Buffalo AP * 1 hr 8 mins ago WASHINGTON – The Bush administration in 2002 considered sending U.S. troops into a Buffalo, N.Y., suburb to arrest a group of terror suspects in what would have been a nearly unprecedented use of military power, The New York Times reported. Vice President Dick Cheney and several other Bush advisers at the time strongly urged that the military be used to apprehend men who were suspected of plotting with al Qaida, who later became known as the Lackawanna Six, the Times reported on its Web site Friday night. It cited former administration officials who spoke on condition of anonymity. The proposal advanced to at least one-high level administration meeting, before President George W. Bush decided against it. Dispatching troops into the streets is virtually unheard of. The Constitution and various laws restrict the military from being used to conduct domestic raids and seize property. According to the Times, Cheney and other Bush aides said an Oct. 23, 2001, Justice Department memo gave broad presidential authority that allowed Bush to use the domestic use of the military against al-Qaida if it was justified on the grounds of national security, rather than law enforcement. Among those arguing for the military use besides Cheney were his legal adviser David S. Addington and some senior Defense Department officials, the Times reported. Opposing the idea were Condoleezza Rice, then the national security adviser; John B. Bellinger III, the top lawyer at the National Security Council; FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III; and Michael Chertoff, then the head of the Justice Department's criminal division. Bush ultimately nixed the proposal and ordered the FBI to make the arrests in Lackawanna. The men were subsequently arrested and pleaded guilty to terrorism-related charges. Scott L. Silliman, a Duke University law professor specializing in national security law, told the Times that a U.S. president had not deployed the active-duty military on domestic soil in a law enforcement capacity, without specific statutory authority, since the Civil War.

To: JohnM who wrote (116491)	7/25/2009 9:09:57 AM
From: Dale Baker	Respond to of 542201

If the country doesn't go your path, it will lead to a catastrophe. That's the familiar Rovian line. The big problem for the right is, the country listened to them and DID go their way for several years. In the end, more than 80% of the electorate believed the country was going in the WRONG direction. So the "only possible route to the best outcomes" has actually been discredited in practice. But it's all we hear as the Republican reformers are drowned out by the base.

To: JohnM who wrote (116491)	7/25/2009 9:40:31 AM
From: ChinuSFO	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542201

Gates' Liberal College Town No Stranger to Racial Dust-Ups Racism Allegations in Recent Past at Harvard and MIT in Cambridge, Mass. By PATRIK JONSSON ATLANTA, July 25, 2009 ...excerpt On the one hand, U.S. universities have created hundreds of departments for African-American studies -- of which Harvard's is arguably the most preeminent. But on the other hand, racial diversity among faculty at U.S. universities -- which columnist Stephanie Ramage calls "bastions of equality and enlightenment" -- is, on the whole, lagging. abcnews.go.com