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: steve harris who wrote (419811)	4/4/2011 5:59:10 AM
From: Nadine Carroll	2 Recommendations Respond to of 793905

Obama remains a community agitator. He stirs up a situation, backs away, then throws all in once he discerns what the winning position will be. Good description of his method. I hadn't thought of it in those terms before. Comes across as rather passive-aggressive.

To: steve harris who wrote (419811)	4/4/2011 11:30:40 AM
From: Katelew	3 Recommendations Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 793905

How can you tell what America's policy on Libya is TODAY Kate? I don't feel any need to do this kind of second-guessing. My basic assumption is that we'll continue trying to assist the rebels and also squeeze Gaddafi out of office. I haven't read anything that contradicts this broad assumption. As for Obama lying, I don't waste much time trying to pin this down either. Same was true with Bush. My working assumption is that all politicians lie in some form or another. They tell the public whatever it takes to get and stay in office. Once in office, they say whatever it takes to pull the public along with their agenda. My concentration is on the agenda itself. Will it produce a net benefit for the country or not? What will the blowback be and who are the winners and losers? These types of questions are what I'm focused on and not so much the amount of prevarication that might have gone in to get the agenda into legislation. As for any contradictions coming out of this administration re the ME, I'm willing to overlook this simply because everything is so fluid. I would say this if Republicans were in office and forced to respond to all these happenings in that part of the world. Because of the constantly changing nature and in so many countries at once, I would expect garbled messaging and contradictions, etc. How could this not be the case?